Re: Debian Etch Stable.
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:47:26AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Sven Luther dijo [Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 11:53:52AM +0100]:
> > > > Which is why we release with gnome 2.14.
> > >
> > > I don't understand. Do you consider this to be a good thing or a bad
> > > thing?
> > As current gnome is 2.16, probably 2.18 before etch is released, i guess he
> > means we are already shiping with outdated packages.
> As with everything, this is positive for some people and negative for
> others :) For one, I welcome we stick to more reliable software,
> instead of just shipping the newest. We are shipping outdated, stable
> packages, and we should be proud of that. That's what makes us differ
> from Ubuntu ;-)
Please look at what is written in the thread :
Quality is not, and has never been, the question.
The question is whether we can hit our quality target without forcing our
users to put up with obsolete software -- either the previous release's
because we keep delaying the release date, or the forthcoming release's
because we have an overly extended freeze.
Which is why we release with gnome 2.14.
I don't understand. Do you consider this to be a good thing or a bad
As current gnome is 2.16, probably 2.18 before etch is released, i guess
he means we are already shiping with outdated packages.
So, basically anthony is saying that we want to hit our quality targets while
not forcing on our users infinitively long release cycles, and release which
are already obsoleted on release. on which Mike said, but hey, we are not
shiping the latest gnome, so even with the "experiment", the goal anthony set
is already not successful, or something such.
/me supposes people will again accuse me of flooding the list, but then i
suppose there are people who should start reading what is actually written,
instead of just parts of it, or react to comments taken out of their context.