Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, sean finney wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 02:55:31PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Good. I just want to point out that "frozen" built on top on rolling
> > (which is what we're proposing here) is different from "frozen" built on
> > top of unstable (which is what we had before the introduction of testing).
>
> Or more clearly: frozen built on top of the next release, after it is
> snapshotted/branched, you mean, right?
No. Frozen in 199x started as a snapshot of unstable with all the
problems that unstable can have. The rules governing testing/rolling
ensure that a large class of problem simply cannot exist in that
distribution.
So the initial state of "frozen" would not be the same today than it was
in the 199x. In theory, in today's frozen, the packages are already
working well enough so that all remaining bugs should be correctable
with targetted fixes.
That's what I tried to express (in case people considered the usage of
"frozen" as a regression to the pre-testing era, note also that britney
with manual hinting can still be used for the frozen distribution).
> Whew. So where does this leave things? It's not entirely clear to me
> whether release team members are against or just skeptical-but-open-to the
> idea. If the latter case, I think the best thing to do would be to formalize
> the proposal (DEP maybe?), set up the test archives/autobuilds, and get
> right to it. Worst case scenario it would be some wasted effort on our
> part, and the release team decides to stick to things, maybe a few
> bugs/tools could be kept as a consolation prize. But alternatively the
> work might pay off for big improvements Wheezy or Wheezy+1.
I'd be glad to help you drive a DEP for this.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)
Reply to: