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

Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:45:29PM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
>  In both cases (with and without the choice), we're bound by the social
>  contract and may or may not diverge in practice.  This choice doesn't
>  have any practical impact and doesn't change any rule or project
>  opinion.

I agree with you.  We should do the right thing and abide by our foundation
documents irrespective of the outcome of the vote.

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 08:44:28PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Are we?  I mean, this stuff is already in the archive, in main, and as
> far as I can tell, the release team can release from main at any point
> in time they see fit (practical considerations notwithstanding).

This is one of the only compelling arguments I have seen thus far.
However, it seems to me that it is a far better idea to fix the problems
in testing than to try to fix them in a stable release.

If the kernel team, instead of letting Ben Hutchings's patches languish
in the BTS, were to upload a fixed linux-2.6, and the release team were
to hint it into lenny, I would change my vote.

Since that is not at all what has happened, I find it strange that
the release team thinks it should be trusted on this matter.

Reply to: