<rant> Why do we need to follow the "traditional" development model? Think about this: 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. </rant> Andrew -- 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