Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
On 04/30/2011 03:24 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 30/04/11 at 14:31 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 04/28/2011 08:20 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
The sooner we get the big transitions done, the sooner we can
focus on fixing the remaining bugs.
There will be always new transitions… you're gonna to wait for
ever.
OK, but I'm under the impression that in the first 6 months of a
release cycle, we usually have a lot more transitions than during the
next 6 months.
True. But, big transitions are announced (fortunately), and long time
before they start, generally. So, you can see what RC is likely to be
fixed by a new upstream release that will be part of a transition, and
which won't. YMMV and I can understand that.
Also, the fact that we don't have a clear release schedule with a
freeze date fixed in advance probably encourages people to start new
transition when the reasonable thing to do would be to stop there
and stabilize.
Quite honestly, we did announce a transition freeze before the big
freeze for Squeeze… and it didn't really worked out. We can hope that
it'll get better for Wheezy, but we are not there yet. We will have a
time-based freeze for Wheezy, let's hope that this will address your
concerns (including those mentioned in the next paragraph).
One thing that I really enjoyed when I was more active in Ubuntu was
the clearly defined release schedules, split into the time when you
can break the world, and the time when everybody works towards
stabilizing (long before the final freeze).
I do agree on this. There is one difference though: they don't care
about fixing packages not in main, it's not a release blocker for them
(almost). We do have to fix much more than the subset they care about before
being able to release.
Regards,
--
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/
Reply to: