On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 12:16:21PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > So, to the questions: > * How important are regular releases for the project? Predictable stable releases are very important. > * How important are regular stable point releases for the project? Having stable releases be supported for a long time is important. Stable point releases are helpful at that -- in that they make it easier for people to install systems that are secure as soon as they boot, and reduce the load on our security mirrors -- but aren't crucial. What we're achieving, which is every few months, and at least every six months, is pretty respectable, imo. (Disclaimer: I'm one of the delaying factors in getting stable releases out, since I've been doing the ftpmaster side of it over the past year) > * Should we fix up dak to allow point-releases for old-stable? Yes -- that will let us do longer term support stable releases, rather than cutting them off a year after the next stable release. > * Could you list the issues that you think delayed the release of etch? Things that weren't ready on time include: * freeze (Dec 11th) * iceweasel/etc (was ready sometime in january iirc) * RC bug count (still high) * kernel (ready to hit testing any time now) I presume the release team have a better idea; I'm certainly hoping/intending that the Dunc-Tank report will give a more detailed summary. I'm pretty impressed that, aiui, d-i wasn't one of those things in any significant way. > Do you think that we need to restructure the release process for lenny > to avoid these? If yes, how? That's the release team's call. > * Do you think that a release of high quality is more important than a > timely release? [ie: Should we switch from "when it's ready" to "when > we said we would release"] We should switch from "We don't know when it will be ready" to "It'll almost certainly be ready by ______". That means being able to do a better job of lots of things -- managing the things that weren't ready on time for etch better in future, eg. It doesn't mean changing our standards *at all* though. Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature