On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 10:49:20AM +0800, Isaac To wrote:
> >>>>> "Henning" == Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net> writes:
>
> Henning> I stand corrected, apparently. (But I have yet to imagine which
> Henning> arguments would be used against doing a release if we happen to
> Henning> find testing in a freezeable state 6 months after sarge
> Henning> releases).
>
> Perhaps because you'd be either forcing busy sys-admins to dist-upgrade
> every 6 months, or forcing maintainers to keep security updates for two
> stable versions?
Oddly enough, most FreeBSD sysadmins don't appear to mind doing things much
more invasive than a dist-upgrade, every six months. This has largely to do
with the fact that most upgrades are very smooth, and don't require, say, a
complete reinstall.
In this regard, Debian actually resembles the *BSDs much more closely than
most other Linux distributions (and that isn't a bad thing).
Oh, and as for security? They're already supporting 'oldstable' for, oh...
about 6 months, or more.
So tell me again why this is supposed to be a bad idea? (One that may
take some practice to achieve, sure, and not one I expect us to hit next
release, though I'd be happy to get it below the steadily expanding history
of Debian - and the current RM's goals appear to be a strong step in that
direction).
--
Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org> ,''`.
Debian GNU/NetBSD(i386) porter : :' :
`. `'
`-
Attachment:
pgp5fVsYKjb3n.pgp
Description: PGP signature