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

Re: Is Etch still stable?



On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 16:03 +0200, Nyizsnyik Ferenc wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:41:28 +0100
> michael <cs@networkingnewsletter.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 11:52 +0200, Nyizsnyik Ferenc wrote:
> > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 01:27:18 -0400
> > > Kevin Mark <kevin.mark@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 10:48:07PM +0200, Nyizsnyik Ferenc wrote:
> > > > > Hello folks,
> > > > > 
> > > > > I visited http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/
> > > > > It used to show 8 bugs "concerning the current stable release",
> > > > > that is Etch, and some 500-600 "concerning the next release".
> > > > > Now it shows 522 bugs for Etch. Am I missing something?
> > > > Yes. The page does not show the word 'etch'. Etch is the current
> > > > stable. Lenny is the next stable. If you look at the graph, the
> > > > bottom line dips near zero at april or may, that was the release
> > > > of Etch.
> > > 
> > > Yes, that bottom line jumped up to 520 recently. Also, 520 bugs are
> > > shown for the current stable release. And we agree on that is Etch,
> > 
> > I disagree! From the above it sounds like the graph is for next
> > stable, which prior to Apr/May was etch but is now lenny. It's not
> > etch only
> 
> Have you folks actually visited the page? 

I hadn't (as I thought I made clear!)


> There are three lines showing
> bug counts:
> RED line:   Total number of release-critical bugs
> GREEN line: Number concerning the next release
> BLUE line:  Number concerning the current stable release

ah, the blue line, that doesn't ring any bell for when I've looked
before...

> Red and green lines have local minimums at June 2005 (Sarge was
> released) and April 2007 (Etch was released). The BLUE line (the one I
> was talking about) started in April 2007 with 8 bugs. Yesterday it went
> up to 522. And "Number concerning the current stable release: 522".

and yes, I concur it says 522 R_C bugs for current stable



Reply to: