Re: More 5 november in the release schedule

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Christian Seiler writes ("Re: More 5 november in the release schedule"):
> If a stable release is going to happen, there needs to be some
> kind of process so that one may converge on a stable result.
> What happens if you only have a single deadline to freeze
> fully? Immediately before that deadline people panic because
> they noticed they didn't take care of their packages enough
> and upload tons of stuff on very short notice - which leads to
> more bugs due to weird interactions that will then have to be
> sorted out during the actual freeze. With the soft deadlines
> added now, this will be relaxed quite a bit, because
> everything doesn't hit at once, but it's spaced out and the
> overall quality will improve.

I agree.

The new system of soft deadlines, autoremoval, etc., creates an
environment where natural human tendencies amongst our contributors
(like doing stuff at the last minute) lead to constructive, rather
than unconstructive actions by those contributors.

There's still big spikes in work for our core teams around deadlines,
so it's still best if people sort their stuff out earlier, but the new
arrangements are a big improvement IMO.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.