Re: delay of the full etch freeze
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 10:32:24PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > 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
> > release-critical bugs.
> I think this is unrealistic, because we cannot predict NEW's
It's true that we can't predict NEW's behavior, but that doesn't make it
right to delay the freeze for non-RC bugfixes caught in NEW. The general
shape of the etch release should be determined for months now, and we should
be in the process of stabilizing for the release -- introducing new packages
is definitely not "stabilizing", so I won't be heartbroken if packages not
related to release-critical bugs don't make it through the queue in time for
> It doesn't follow that somebody "waited that late"; it may
> well be instead that they did everything they could, and it was the
> processing of NEW that waited a long time.
According to http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html, the oldest package in
NEW is 3 weeks old. 3 weeks ago was more than a full month after the
original proposed base freeze date for etch. Sorry, no, I'm not going to
lose any sleep over such packages not making it into etch before the freeze.
Steve Langa[Asek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.