Re: Debian decides to adopt time-based release freezes
Marc Haber <email@example.com> wrote:
> 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.
For the record: I concur fully with Marc's statement above.
Changing our release policy to match Ubuntu's LTS, changing our
well-established, well-recognized logo for a simplified crap that has
nothing special to it... What next?
If some of our "core teams" members feel like they'd rather work on
Ubuntu, then, by all means, please go ahead and arrange that with
Shuttleworth. You'll be better for everybody.
Turning Debian into Ubuntu's bitch, however, is not a viable way
forward for anybody involved.
Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer - <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Public key available on <http://www.jblache.org> - KeyID: F5D6 5169
GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169