Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
* Lucas Nussbaum (firstname.lastname@example.org) [110428 19:57]:
> On 28/04/11 at 18:04 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> > On 28/04/2011 17:25, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > On 28/04/11 at 16:52 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> > >>
> > >> 1) At the beginning of the developement cycle, (with the new plan) you
> > >> start from testing, and not the new stable. So, you don't start with a
> > >> base that's rc-bug free, or at least, as polished as the new stable is.
> > >
> > > That's true. But the counter-argument to that is that, since new
> > > packages will get some testing in rolling, all the new and broken stuff
> > > will not land in unstable at the same time, and we won't end up with 800
> > ^^^^^^^^
> > "new rolling"? (and you seem to use "testing" in the next sentence).
> > (I really think that we should forget about "rolling" for now… since it's
> > confusing even for you)
> No, I meant unstable. What happens currently is that most DDs hold off
> work during the freeze, and then upload new and broken stuff shortly
> after the release, leading to several concurrent transitions.
People try out new things in experimental, and it seems to work mostly
well to get new stuff migrated from there via unstable to testing once
the release is done (except that we try to not do too many things in
parallel - and things have improved within the recent years).
> Could we try to stay on focus and constructive, and avoid bringing
> poneys in the discussion?
Oh, I thought that discussion is just about poneys?