Re: Bug#238193: use debconf to manage permissions of ls-r not high-priority question
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 11:31:38AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Colin Watson <email@example.com> schrieb:
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 10:28:56AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> The problem is that in fact we don't know whether sarge will be released
> >> within weeks or months. Currently we are dividing our efforts between
> >> the current packages with rather outdated tetex-2.0.2 and tetex-3.0
> >> which will be released within the next weeks (in this case really 2-6
> >> weeks, I'm sure).
> > I think it's a bad idea to try to get new major versions of major
> > systems like tetex into sarge at the moment, and I think trying to do so
> > is likely to delay sarge.
> If we could be sure that sarge will be released, say, before July, I
> would totally agree with you. But we can't, at least I don't know. If we
> happen to release in October, base is frozen sometime in July, and other
> stuff later in Summer, then I would find it hard to explain to users why
> we didn't include tetex from March or early April.
> I think what is delaying sarge is not that the evil maintainers ;-) of
> $package try to get their new upstream version in. It's rather that they
> don't know whether they should try to do so, or concentrate on fixing
> bugs that will likely not occurr in new upstream at all.
There will hopefully be another release update soon; we're holding
reasonably to the last schedule posted on -devel-announce, although
there are still a number of serious bugs in the base system that need to
be ironed out and a few more architectures that need to be hammered into
shape for d-i. In the meantime, it does make our lives harder in release
planning when people drop in major new versions of major packages, and
it makes it harder to get a freeze working.
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]