Re: New stable version after Sarge
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 09:06:20AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:31:41 +1100, Andrew Pollock
> <apollock@debian.org> wrote:
> >That said, this (rather large) blocker shouldn't be the issue it has been
> >for this release for the next one. The two biggest blockers to releasing any
> >time soon have been the installer and the security infrastructure. I'm
> >actually not abreast of what the issue is with the security infrastructure,
> >so I don't know if it's likely to be a blocker all over again come etch
> >release time. I'd like to think it's going to easier to release etch sooner.
>
> I am more pessimistic about this. Boot floppies and security
> infrastructure have been delaying woody for multiple months as well,
> and if we don't have security and installer delaying etch, I am pretty
> convinced that there will other stoppers this time.
Like the big blob of GFDL issues and other things related to that.
> We have been talking about a "release nightmare" with potato and
> woody, and that sarge is an even bigger one is as clear as one can
> see. I suspect a tendency here.
Unfortunatly me too.
If we want to release more often we need two branches. A regular
development branch like this one and one that only update packages
that do not affect anything (?) else. Like the point releases but with
little more relaxed rules.
Regards,
// Ola
> Greetings
> Marc
>
> --
> -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
> Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
> Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/
> Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
>
>
--
--------------------- Ola Lundqvist ---------------------------
/ opal@debian.org Annebergsslingan 37 \
| opal@lysator.liu.se 654 65 KARLSTAD |
| +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
| http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 |
\ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: