On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 08:08:05PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:34:20PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > > > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time > > > it takes for a new stable version. > > > What about saying something like: the next stable release comes in > > > the beginning of 2006? > > The release date for a Debian release is not set by a calendar but by > > quality. At least that's been the case including sarge. Hence, such > > a sentence would not mean anything. > Then let's accept the premise behind the whole testing idea and target > Sarge+1 for Sarge+6 months. > Or does the <foo> team have plan that will stall that release for > another year? Yes, I don't think the release team has any intention of working itself ragged to get a second release out 6 months after sarge. I also don't think there's any consensus among developers (or users) that we *want* to release Debian that frequently. A 6-month period honestly doesn't allow us much time for new development anyway. If all we wanted was a point release of sarge, that'd be fine; but I think most people would like to see etch be an improvement over sarge in more respects than just hardware driver count, and we have to be realistic that this means a period of heavy changes followed by a period to stabilize everything again. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature