On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 10:57:57AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:15:05 +0100, Carlos Sousa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >testing is, in my opinion, the feature that sets Debian apart from all
> >other Linux distributions. It's as if woody is released every day.
>
> If we had
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:15:05 +0100, Carlos Sousa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>testing is, in my opinion, the feature that sets Debian apart from all
>other Linux distributions. It's as if woody is released every day.
If we had a security team working for testing, testing would be the
distribution o
Johnny Ernst Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
> While you guys get Woody ready, I will try to find out more about the
> current release procedure and the past of Debian development.
>
> Hopefully I will see you all again May 2Nd.
Or better, start help fixing bugs now.
You've
On 11 Apr 2002 21:27:23 -0400
Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think testing is an excellent thing to have, since it
> provides a semi-stable proto-release. Unfortunately it is
> true that the existence of testing hasn't shortened the
> release cycle.
testing is, in my opinion, the fea
Good day everyone,
thank you for a lot of input.
As a fair number of you have pointed out, you are all quite busy with
getting Woody out the door.
I aggree that is important, and that the release process can not be
changed now right in the middle of Woody-work.
Priority right now is fixing bugs
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 08:39:54PM -0500, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:27:23PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> > birthdays. Many of us haven't read _every_ posting on _every_
> > debian list for the past six years and may therefore once in
> > a whi
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:27:23PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> Torsten Landschoff replied that "This was the whole idea of
> testing. Experience shows it does not work."
>
> I think testing is an excellent thing to have, since it
> provides a semi-stable proto-release. Unfortunately it is
> tru
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:27:23PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> birthdays. Many of us haven't read _every_ posting on _every_
> debian list for the past six years and may therefore once in
> a while bring up some issue that has been discussed previously.
This isn't exactly every debian list for th
Johnny Ernst Nielsen: Don't worry about flames launched by
cranky developers who didn't get what they wanted for their
birthdays. Many of us haven't read _every_ posting on _every_
debian list for the past six years and may therefore once in
a while bring up some issue that has been discussed pre
On Apr 11, Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> To make things worse, 3.0 contents will at the time of release
> already be about 6 months out of date.
Here's a challenge for you: identify the top date in the changelog for
the current version of every package in testing (3.0). I doubt
there's a single
Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> Do you think you could put your 6 year old attitude aside for a few
> moments and take this as a contructive proposal as other normal
> grownups would do?
Having discussed all this before in my 6 year old tenure with Debian,
no, I really don't have time to rehash it
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 11:46:55PM +0200, Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> I am not a developer, and I am not suited for code development.
> But I would like to spend untill 1St of May collecting additional
> information about the release procedures.
Currently that is black magic, mostly the relea
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 11:13:49PM +0200, Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> Thank you Joey for being so obliging to a constructive proposal, and
> thank you for your polite way of replying to my proposal.
>
> Do you think you could put your 6 year old attitude aside for a few
> moments and take this
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Rune B. Broberg wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 11:13:49PM +0200, Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> > Thank you Joey for being so obliging to a constructive proposal, and
> > thank you for your polite way of replying to my proposal.
> >
> > Do you think you
Good day Matt,
thank you for your kind answer.
> > At the current pace 3.0 may be out right around May 1St 2002.
> > At that time it will have been more than 1 year and 6 months
> > since the previous point release, which by then contains packages
> > more than 1 year and 6 months old.
>
> Er, it
Good day Torsten,
thank you for your kind answer.
> > The main proposal is to introduce a fixed short Testing
> > development period into the development cycle like this:
> >
> > 1. Feed Unstable packages to Testing for a fixed short period of
> > time. 2. Freeze, bugfix, release.
> > Repeat.
>
>
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 11:13:49PM +0200, Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> Thank you Joey for being so obliging to a constructive proposal, and
> thank you for your polite way of replying to my proposal.
>
> Do you think you could put your 6 year old attitude aside for a few
> moments and take this
Thank you Joey for being so obliging to a constructive proposal, and
thank you for your polite way of replying to my proposal.
Do you think you could put your 6 year old attitude aside for a few
moments and take this as a contructive proposal as other normal
grownups would do?
If you think I h
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:20:27PM +0200, Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> The main proposal is to introduce a fixed short Testing development
> period into the development cycle like this:
>
> 1. Feed Unstable packages to Testing for a fixed short period of time.
> 2. Freeze, bugfix, release.
> R
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:20:27PM +0200, Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> At the current pace 3.0 may be out right around May 1St 2002.
> At that time it will have been more than 1 year and 6 months since
> the previous point release, which by then contains packages more than
> 1 year and 6 months
Johnny Ernst Nielsen wrote:
> Debian's current problem with old packages can be seen by the fact
> that a number of vendors have reportedly dumped the current Stable
> release in favor of the Testing distribution some time ago.
> That can only mean that currentness of content has become more
> i
NOTE!
I am *not* talking about release dates.
(Anyone who starts talking release dates from hereon will be taken
out back and given an ice cold shower-down ;o))
Through time many people have criticised Stable Debian for having an
extremely slow release cycle, which causes an outdated distributio
22 matches
Mail list logo
