Re: Will woody ever become stable?
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 02:49:00PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> I had a longer discussion with our release manager who said in this
> discussion that there's no progress in the freeze of woody. We won't enter
> the next stage of the freeze until the base and standard packages are in a
> releasable state - and the number of RC bugs in these packages is
> increasing (one reason is e.g. that some of these packages like
> boot-floppies break when new upstream versions of other packages they
> depend on are uploaded which may lead to RC bugs like #127405). woody is
> officially frozen for several months but it's still possible for new
> upstream versions of every package to enter testing.
Hmm.
I'll bite.
I would like to ask our release manager for more information. More
effort is required to herd the kittens.
I really don't feel in-touch with how the freeze is going, and I
imagine that I'm not alone in that. For example, I think I thought
that Adrian is incorrect above, that certain packages are frozen. I
thought I'd seen notes suggesting that some packages were frozen, in
fact. Base?
I would like to see weekly 'freeze update' reports, sent here, telling
us what goals have been passed, and what the current stopping points
are. Something like the following:
Freeze Update
-------------
Status
We are *still* trying to freeze standard and the task packages. This
won't be possible until they are cleared of RC bugs ...
...
Uploads
Maintainers of base packages should only upload security fixes and
fixes for serious bugs. These should be uploaded to
woody-proposed-updates.
Maintainers of standard and task packages should try to avoid new
code, and work to fix bugs.
Maintainers of (non-task) optional and extra packages should, at the
moment, continue to track new upstream versions, but should also work
to remove RC bugs.
...
Or something like that. Is the above even a correct depiction? I
don't know...
Herd us harder! ;-)
Jules
Reply to: