Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com> writes: > The thing is, that if lenny will be released post-deadline, all the > improvements carried by it will be of no use for the 64-bit battle that > will have finished by late 2008. I don't believe that there will be a 64-bit battle in late 2008, and I don't accept some loose interpolation from numbers of the past by someone I wouldn't trust to count from 1 to 10 correctly [1] as an argument here. Basically I would like to development on etch to take about 18 months, which would mean releasing in (late) 2008. I don't believe that we will be able to hold that date, but 21 months sounds realistic, which would mean releasing around my 23st birthday [4]. I found the etch release cycle to be mostly OK, with only some rough edges that could be avoided for lenny [3] We (as the release team) will send another mail to dda in the next few days or weeks, giving a detailed overview about our experiences with etch, what we want to change for lenny and what pet goals we have this time. I don't believe that Debian is able to release in much less than 18 months, and FWIW, ESR is not a good reason to move from a goal-based schedule to a time-based schedule. Marc, not speaking for the release team here Footnotes: [1] ie not including essays about non-free multimedia crap we need to support [2] I would like that. [3] QA measures searching for bugs starting very late, this should be done earlier for etch and the kernel situation was a bit of a problem. -- BOFH #110: The rolling stones concert down the road caused a brown out
Attachment:
pgpRmKV0NyiPv.pgp
Description: PGP signature