On Wed,03.Mar.10, 12:04:47, Stephen Powell wrote: > On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 16:18:28 -0500 (EST), Freeman wrote: > > With the same amount of resources (the same number of DDs), but less > > time of course you have to cut somewhere. One possibility would be > > reducing the amount of new features, as in not package the absolutely > > latest version of softwares, but focus on versions that are already > > known to be stable. > > Doesn't that defeat the primary purpose of "timed freezes?" Wasn't the > whole idea to keep the stable release more current? My point was that Not as far as I know. The target is to freeze every two years, which is more or less what happened in previous years without even trying to stick to some schedule. And because Debian has its inertia it will probably come close to 2 years this time as well (lenny was frozen in July 2008) The plan to freeze squeeze so early (the first proposal was December, which was then moved to March due to objections of a lot of DDs) was due to trying to sync the Debian release with Ubuntu LTS. See the archives of debian-devel and debian-release for more info. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature