On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 02:08:33PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote: > Woody was effectively frozen around Jan 2002, no major changes to > packages were permitted, etc. I'm sorry, but you're still wrong. No major changes to subsystems were allowed -- like switching to KDE 3, or new Qt, or new Gnome, or new perl. Considering we still don't have those in a releasable state, I'm not really bothered by that. Normal packages could get changes as long as they weren't uploaded much later than the beginning of April. > The fact that other distributions make releases 2 - 3 times a year > and debian still does multi year releases ...is not a comment I'm going to accept from someone who's listed as the maintainer of a swathe of packages which have been in an unreleasable state for over a month. If you want to release ever four to six months, you can't leave bugs llike #147762 open for a year. > Right now we generally close a bug once it goes > into unstable but that bug that was just fixed probably still exists in > testing. Right now we have 20,000 open bugs in unstable, almost 700 of which are release critical. There are some 600 packages uninstallable on i386 in unstable. By the best estimate we have available, there are around 585 RC bugs in testing, and 7 uninstallable packages. If you would like to do anything about any of this -- fix bugs in unstable, fix bugs in testing, provide security updates for testing -- you're welcome to. > In general I don't think its a good idea for a package to having only > one maintainer. So get some helpers. No one's stopping you. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <email@example.com> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''
Description: PGP signature