Re: September Release?
hi
On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 10:29:14PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 08:00:52PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 01:39:16AM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > > But yes, I will protest most strongly if we freeze before I get 3.3.4
> > > > packaged. I got way too much grief from people for leaving 3.3.2.3 in
> > > > slink even though our freeze schedule pretty much made that decision for
> > > > me.
> > >
> > > If we have a short freeze-time this should not be an issue.
> > > On the other hand, it would be good to have some definate goals for
> > > potato so that we can actually know when is the right time to freeze.
> >
> > The las time this was discussed it was determined better not to have release
> > goals anymore. Just freeze, fix bugs, release.
>
> Then we need a schedule. My point is that there must be some trigger for
> a freeze -- either a set date, or a set of release goals. Otherwise we could
> continue forever without a freeze. I don't mind whether it's a set of goals
> or a date -- actually, both might be good, since it will push the goals
> through too.
>
> > > Why not wait for Linux 2.4 while we're at it?
> > No! This will delay us another few months I am sure.
>
> I wasn't serious. But Branden wants to wait for X to be released.
> In the same vein, we could wait for a new kernel. (We shouldn't, though.)
just looking around for base stuff which could affect a lot of
packages in potato, it seems there are only two essential:
- X 3.3.4. Branden is ready to roll it into potato ASAP
- gcc 2.95. It is binary incompatible with egcs 1.1, therefore
lots of stuff have to be recompiled against new libstdc++.
Should be out this week/next week
The proposal is to wait for this big stuff, roll it in and then
immediately declare freeze. If X/gcc go out soon, freeze date
could be around Aug 1st.
> Hamish
OK
Reply to: