[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: slink is gone, goals for potato?

On Tue, Mar 02, 1999 at 06:26:33PM -0500, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 02, 1999 at 09:20:11AM -0500, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
> > 
> > > I fear the only way to shorten the freeze time is to have a disincentive
> > > to work on unstable.  Either don't allow uploads at all, a period when
> > > uploads aren't allowed (near release time or near freeze time or both), or
> > > some other strange scheme.  Unfortunately, everything I can think of to
> > > shorten a freeze will hurt unstable.
> > 
> > ...and hurting unstable is E V I L !!!!
> I agree that's it's evil, that's the reason for the "unfortunately".

yeah, i figured that. just thought it needed to be said BEFORE someone
else said something saying like 'hurting unstable is an acceptable price
for speeding up frozen'.

as has been discussed many times before, it is NOT an acceptable price.
it will do debian no good at all to destroy the enthusiasm of productive
developers who have nothing to work on for frozen but are prevented from
working on unstable.

trying that is one sure way of pissing off half (or more) of the
developers...we're all volunteers and we work on what interests us
and/or what we are capable of in the time we have available.

"what interests us" and "what we are capable of" may or may not have any
resemblance to what is needed for the freeze or release.

This is why i think that releases should be handled by a volunteer
Release Team who pick the best stuff from unstable and turn it into a
release...the freeze -> stable release cycle should be independant of
the live "unstable" debian.

> > there have been various proposals on ways to minimise the freeze period,
> > starting with Bdale's one during the hamm freeze.  IMO, something
> > like that is the *only* way we're going to get the freeze down to
> > a reasonable time....and best of all, it actually takes advantage
> > of the fact that debian is a "live" distribution rather than try to
> > force it into some static, dead, commercial-release type mold.
> Any better pointers?  I'd like to see this thread because I know we've
> been trough it before, but a search for Bdale in devel over the last 6
> months was empty.

i'll try to dig up a reference. if i find one, i'll email it to you
later today. i know that bdale first suggested it during the hamm
freeze. several other people came up with similar proposals about 2
months into the slink freeze.

if we don't do something about it, people will be suggesting it again 2
or 3 months into the potato freeze, AND the freeze after that AND the
one after that too.  IMO it's the only sensible way of managing releases
for a software project as large and as dynamic as debian.


craig sanders

Reply to: