Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:25:48PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <ajk@debian.org> writes:
>
> > On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> >> Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were
> >> working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons,
> >> and freezes were shorter.
> >
> > That's not true (unless you are talking about something that was ceased
> > several years before testing became live, certainly before I started
> > following Debian development in 1998). Before testing the RM used to
> > fork unstable into a "frozen" distribution. Unstable was still open for
> > development, and heated arguments developed on this very list asking
> > that the process be changed so that unstable would be frozen; this was
> > never done.
> >
> > I don't know what you mean by "pretest cycles with bug horizons".
> >
>
> You are correct. It seems so old to me that I didn't even recall
> it was a fork. This indeed explains why that process had to
> be improved. It also explains why the current process needs to
> be improved as well.
>
> Thanks to Ubuntu, we now have a good example of what's proven
> to work.
>
I think it is premature to declare that Ubuntu's model works any better than
what we're currently doing, in the long run.
regards
Andrew
--
linux.conf.au 2005 - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - Birthplace of Tux
April 18th to 23rd - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - LINUX
Canberra, Australia - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - Get bitten!
Reply to: