[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Time to make the new stable release of Debian Edu?


On Wednesday 09 May 2007 11:38, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Given that we can polish the next release of Debian Edu forever, and
> that the old sarge based release is showing its age, I believe we
> should finish up a new stable release soon, with the stuff that is
> already working, and prepare for an updated version within three
> months. 

I agree.

> I suggest we make a new test04 test release in a few days, update the
> documentation to match it the next few days, and then release test04
> (possibly including more bug fixes discovered and implemented while
> the documentation was written) as the next stable release of debian
> edu in a month.

On http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Status/Etch there is a link, called "bugs 
which we want to fix for etch, are confirmed and not documentation related" 
which shows all bugs with Priority 1,2 and 3 (excluding the unconfirmed ones 
and the documentation related ones):


I suggest we release (the stable version, not test4) not earlier as this link 
doesnt show any bugs with Prio 1 and 2. Currently thats 4 bugs left (the rest 
has Prio 3=we want to fix them, but we might not manage.)

http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Status/Etch also shows some more Bugs which 
are not in bugzilla, I'll start *now* to move them into bugzilla.

I think it's important that we use comprehensible criterias when we release. 
For me this means: no bugs left in bugzilla which are a.) confirmed, b.) not 
documentation related (i'm willing to argue on that, documentation is 
important) and c.) have Prio 1 or 2.

Of course, this has the "danger" of moving the discussion whether we fix this 
or that bug into a "bugzilla-war", but a.) I dont think we'll have 
bugzila-wars, we are reasonable people working on a common goal and b.) this 
is where such a _discussion_ (not war) belongs :)

Also, everybody how has a "pet-bug" is able to see, that "we don't care" and 
has the opportunity to fix those bugs themselves.


Attachment: pgpYhgRVSgl5l.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: