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

Re: Debian decides to adopt time-based release freezes

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:12:58AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 July 2009, Meike Reichle wrote:
> > The Debian project has decided to adopt a new policy of time-based
> > development freezes for future releases, on a two-year cycle.
> Disappointing to see such an announcement without any prior discussion on 
> d-project, d-devel or d-vote. 

Sure makes the dicussion harder and more confrontational, if nothing else.
Are we trying to make people long for the days of [0]?

 [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/03/msg00012.html

> Some explanation of how and by who this 
> decision was reached would be appreciated.

For one, it'd be fascinating to know why it's a two year cycle starting
about one year from the last release instead of about two. I'm presuming
the answer is "It'd be awkward for Ubuntu to sync with, given their
last LTS release was early 2008 and they've kind-of promised two year
cycles". I'm not seeing why a freeze anywhere in March-July in even
years wouldn't suffice for both issues though.

For two, it means squeeze is getting a ten month development phase
(mid Feb to sometime in Dec), of which five-and-a-half months have
already gone. So, hey, downhill run with only, uh, 1100-odd RC bugs to
fix. We've never had that many RC bugs to fix before, but we had about
600 nine-months before lenny released, and I guess about 400 when lenny
froze this time last year.

For three, what happened to getting the firmware issue resolved early in
squeeze's cycle [1]? It's evidently no longer early in squeeze's cycle,
so maybe I just somehow missed the decision on that...

 [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2009/05/msg00000.html

As far as making decisions at debconf (or irc) rather than via the
lists goes, I read an article about PowerPoint use in the military
[2] that strikes me as kinda parallel: having time to look over these
proposals calmly first rather than having to immediately react seems
generally helpful.

 [2] http://www.afji.com/2009/07/4061641

And, umm, presuming Debian manages a five month freeze (ie, 1.5
months less than lenny's), and it releases in April, as presumably
does Ubuntu 10.04 LTS (leisuresuit lorikeet?), why bother running
Debian stable? Ubuntu comes with paid, full-time security support;
it'll have pretty much everything Debian does, and probably a bit more;
its popularity will probably provide better hardware support including
preinstalled systems in some cases... And hey, for machines still running
etch, it'll probably be just as easy to upgrade to Ubuntu as it would
be to skip lenny and go to squeeze.

Someone remind me why it'll be worth caring about stable?


Reply to: