Re: New stable version after Sarge
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 04:16:49 -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Paul van der Vlis(email@example.com)@2005-01-04 14:40:
>> One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it
>> takes for a new stable version.
> I guess one man's meat is another man's poison.
> Since I administer a large number of distant computers I view the long
> time between stable releases as a feature not a bug.
>> What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in the
>> beginning of 2006?
> Once a year works for me, but any more frequent would be a pain in the
> neck. Frankly a release every 18 months seems about right.
>> I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready", but
>> many people have to work together. Maybe it's better to say: "a package
>> releases when it's ready, but the deadline for the next Debian release
>> is a fixed date".
> Also the concept of "releases when it's ready" seems to be a little
> contrived. When *what* is ready exactly? The current system of defining a
> release seems to involve identifying a number is arbitrarily
> characteristics that will define the new version. The release occurs when
> they are complete and the RC bug list is low.
> Perhaps a date based release mechanism could be built using a new
> distribution, call it prestable.
> Packages qualify to be enter prestable after residing in testing for ten
> days and having NO RC BUGS. The idea is to keep prestable in a highly
> stable state at all times, a rolling stable if you will.
> So a package follows the following path:
> unstable --> testing --> prestable --(approx. 12 months)--> stable
> People running servers (like myself) will stick with stable. Those wanting
> a reasonably stable system but want the latest features run prestable.
> Those wanting the very latest but don't care about RC bugs run testing.
> Developers normally run unstable.
> In some ways prestable would resemble the current stable when the release
> manager has begun freezing it.
> Of course one would not want prestable to be released with critical
> components missing. To prevent such a thing a number of packages are
> identified as release essential (RE). Every RE package has to have
> migrated from testing to prestable for the annual release to take place.
> Any non-RE packages with RC bugs at release time simply do not make it
> into the stable release for that year. If it looks like a critical package
> will be ommited the release manager can always make that package RE.
> Although the target is for an annual release to occur, the proposed
> mechanism also permits the project to identify a set of features for the
> new release. For example, had prestable existed for 3.1 the new installer
> would have been listed as RE.
> So ... Debian would still release "when its ready" but everyone has a
> better idea of what "ready" means simply by looking at the RE package
There's a discussion of release proposals ongoing at
Please look around there to see what's going on and understand the ideas
that have been proposed.
I usually have a GPG digital signature included as an attachment.
See http://www.gnupg.org/ for info about these digital signatures.