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

Re: Debian decides to adopt time-based release freezes


On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 08:45:41AM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
> Why not freeze in June 2010 instead of December 2009 and then freeze
> again in December 2011*?  Mark Shuttleworth seems (at least seemed) to
> be fine with delaying Ubuntu LTS by half a year to get Ubuntu and Debian
> in sync [1]:
> | The LTS will be either 10.04 or 10.10 - based on the conversation that
> | is going on right now between Debian and Ubuntu.

I don't think that we shouldn't time our releases according to what
Mark Shuttleworth says. We are not Ubuntu's slave even if they try
hard to make it look like that.

In fact, I would prefer if Ubuntu had to change _their_ scheduled to
accomodate us, if they want to have the advantage of being in sync
with us. It's _their_ advantage after all, not ours.

Our 18-to-24-month release cycle was a nice vehicle to stay
asynchronous with Ubuntu, which _I_ consider a desireable feature to
prevent Debian from perishing. We are not only major supplier to
Ubuntu, we have our end customers ourselves. I'd prefer that it stayed
that way.


Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 3221 2323190

Reply to: