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

Re: Debian versioning scheme (r1 vs .1)

also sprach Joel Baker <lucifer@lightbearer.com> [2002.11.04.1709 -0500]:
> > Uh, you know that January is coming up and we are on a biannual
> > schedule, right? Can we release in January, please?
> *snort* *giggle* *breaks down in gales of laughter*
> Biannual? By last report, it was more like bienneal, and not looking to
> change any time in the forseeable future. If you want an actual release
> schedule, Debian is far from the place to be looking.

The thing about Debian is that it's what we make of it. Period. So if
we want that, we can do it.

> Many people do not want to change "we'll release it when it's ready" to
> "we'll release what is ready".

Define 'ready'? 

I am quite aware of the Debian philosophy, and it's the reason I am
here and actively engaged with the project. But I don't see any reason
why there can't be a freeze state of testing every couple of months,
bugs worked away, and a new release put out. That's really what the
three stage system is designed for.

Whatever, flame to /dev/null please. I am just saying how Debian could
be made better (and expressing my willingness to help, as always...)

 .''`.     martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :'  :    proud Debian developer, admin, and user
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system

Attachment: pgpzAMI6xKY1y.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: