On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 12:33:28PM +0000, Sam Hartman wrote: > While I do think that 4-5 years is a good term length, I do think a > lot of churn can be bad, and 2-r makes a lot of sense to me for the > reason you give above. Not sure if you've read it Sam, but just in case: I find Phil's example in <[🔎] 871toz16nz.fsf@hands.com> to be most convincing against the 2-R model in general. If, OTOH, your objective is avoid churn in the *short* term, then dropping the transitional measure as mentioned by Scott and Lucas would be more than enough. (And, in fact, we can even have intermediate solutions like bumping the transitional measure from 1 months to 6.) Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature