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

Re: Shortening release cycles

Why do we need to follow the "traditional" development model? Think about

When we release a new stable, we immediatly set goals for the next stable
(FHS, PAM, etc.) Why do we need to have 2.1 2.2 2.3 3.0 etc? 

I propose that after 2.2 (whether it is an updated slink or a released
potato) that future Debian GNU/Linux releases come in the form of
"Milestones" based on what we want for Debian. So, Debian Milestone 3
would be announced when we have FHS compliance and PAM working. Milestone
4 could be a new libc. This would still give us targets, but it would give
incentive to keep the distribution stable (ie working boot-floppies) since
we would be releasing a Milestone rather often, depending on how often we
meet the goals we set. 

Debian should evolve to fit what we percieve as goals to create a
technically superior system, and our release cycle should reflect the
goals we set, not what time of year it is.



Andrew G. Feinberg agf@debian.org andrew@ultraviolet.org
Pager: 1-888-950-5050 PIN 6093780
PGP: 0xDBE2B5E9 / 78 55 2B B4 A7 B2 96 FF  84 BA 4A 3F 23 82 DD 80

Attachment: pgpxS3VBduNyp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: