Re: delay of the full etch freeze
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 10:22:43PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Charles Plessy]
> > The rationale is that the 8th is "old freeze deadline minus 10
> > days", so it was not completely unreasonnable to take this day as
> > the deadline for having new packages in Etch.
> I find this completely unreasonable. If someone waited that late in
> the release process before uploading a package they knew would have to
> go through NEW, they can not expect the package to make it into Etch.
> New packages should have had at least a few weeks in unstable to allow
> problems to be detected before heading for testing.
> So I would recommend against moving the freeze deadline to allow
> packages in NEW to enter.
Yes, this is my official position on the question (dunno about Andi's, I'm
replying to email off-line at the moment and haven't checked with him, but I
would guess his position is similar).
The only packages in NEW that I'm inclined to worry about are those that fix
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.