Re: Time-based freezes
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Luk Claes <luk@debian.org> [2009.11.11.1859 +0100]:
>> As far as I have seen it was not the message, but the title that was wrong.
>>
>>> There are still media expecting us to freeze in December.
>> We did send another announcement [1] to rectify that.
>>
>>> The media seem to think that what happened in July was officially
>>> sanctioned (due to it being an official press announcement). Ever
>>> since, a lot of discussion, the decision was reverted, and
>>> a tentative freeze date announced. No announcement about any of this
>>> was made, so you cannot really blame the media for assuming that the
>>> goals of July are still current.
>> There was another announcement [1].
>>
>>> Does this make sense and explain my motivation now?
>> Not really. There was another press announcement [1] and as far as
>> I've seen the media used indeed sometimes wrong titles, but the
>> focus if not all of their message was around time based freezes
>> and not so much about any particular date.
>
> Hm, strange. I cannot recall the article(s) that made me write my
> initial message. It definitely seemed like this announcement was
> never seen or absorbed by anyone. Maybe the two were too close to
> each other.
>
> So http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2009/msg00010.html
> together with the announcement about a tentative goal March is still
> current?
Yes. March is not set in stone, though unless there are major reasons
(like a way too high RC bug count) not to, it will be the time we freeze.
Cheers
Luk
Reply to: