On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 07:18:34AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> For this not to happen, we might need to have an already established
> release team for etch. Maybe the people currently involved in the
> release team as RM and assistant RM just want to continue the hard
> work. M
to have an already established
release team for etch. Maybe the people currently involved in the
release team as RM and assistant RM just want to continue the hard
work. Maybe some of you people just want to get a break
Anyway, I think that we would all benefit in knowing as soon as
possible
Giuseppe Sacco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Il giorno lun, 13-06-2005 alle 13:43 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG ha
> scritto:
>> Giuseppe Sacco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > There are a lot of new large packages that needs a *lot* of testing
>> > before being releaseable. I think a one year re
* Thomas Bushnell BSG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050613 22:46]:
> Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > A key point is certainly building up a release schedule ASAP so that
> > all individual maintainers can establish their own schedules for their
> > packages. For instance, it will certainl
Il giorno lun, 13-06-2005 alle 13:43 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG ha
scritto:
> Giuseppe Sacco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > There are a lot of new large packages that needs a *lot* of testing
> > before being releaseable. I think a one year release is really
> > impossibile, while a two years r
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A key point is certainly building up a release schedule ASAP so that
> all individual maintainers can establish their own schedules for their
> packages. For instance, it will certainly have a great influence on
> the d-i team projects for the instal
Giuseppe Sacco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There are a lot of new large packages that needs a *lot* of testing
> before being releaseable. I think a one year release is really
> impossibile, while a two years release seems reasonable to me.
We can just release those packages in etch+1 if they c
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 11:26:44AM +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> El sáb, 11-06-2005 a las 08:15 +0200, Giuseppe Sacco escribió:
> > Why do you want a new release without other new important packages like,
> > just to make an example, X.org?
> >
> > There are a lot of new large packages t
El sáb, 11-06-2005 a las 17:30 -0500, Bill Allombert escribió:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 11:26:44AM +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> > Why do you want a release with X.org packages and not with . (fill
> > in here). The problem is that Debian is quite huge and have packages
> > with ver
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 11:26:44AM +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> Why do you want a release with X.org packages and not with . (fill
> in here). The problem is that Debian is quite huge and have packages
> with very different schedules and in different cycles of their live. If
> we re
Il giorno sab, 11-06-2005 alle 11:26 +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo ha
scritto:
> El sáb, 11-06-2005 a las 08:15 +0200, Giuseppe Sacco escribió:
[...]
> > There are a lot of new large packages that needs a *lot* of testing
> > before being releaseable. I think a one year release is really
> > impos
* Sebastian Ley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050611 12:17]:
> Am Samstag, 11. Juni 2005 07:43 schrieb Steve Langasek:
>
> > I'm also not really convinced that a 12-month release cycle is actually a
> > good idea at this point -- in terms of either setting believable
> > expectations, or what users of stab
Am Samstag, 11. Juni 2005 07:43 schrieb Steve Langasek:
> I'm also not really convinced that a 12-month release cycle is actually a
> good idea at this point -- in terms of either setting believable
> expectations, or what users of stable actually want (clearly anyone who
> stuck with woody for th
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 11:46:12AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >There are a lot of new large packages that needs a *lot* of testing
> >before being releaseable. I think a one year release is really
> >impossibile, while a two years release seems reasonable to me.
> So
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>There are a lot of new large packages that needs a *lot* of testing
>before being releaseable. I think a one year release is really
>impossibile, while a two years release seems reasonable to me.
So Ubuntu does not actually exist?
--
ciao,
Marco
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
El sáb, 11-06-2005 a las 08:15 +0200, Giuseppe Sacco escribió:
> Il giorno ven, 10-06-2005 alle 18:58 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG ha
> scritto:
> > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> > By the end of June, decide the release criteria.
> >
> > By the end of September, have the GCC cha
On 2005-06-11 Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> By the end of September, have the GCC changes in place and other
> infrastructural changes that we know we expect. Have filed bug
> reports on whatever new RC issues will need to be fixed for etch.
> (Such as the GCC change, and
> Because I value what little of my sanity remains, and am guarding it
> jealously. A 12-month release cycle for etch would mean that someone else
> would need to take point on it; the rate at which the release team's
> involvement would have to ramp up again for a 12-month cycle wouldn't leave
>
Il giorno ven, 10-06-2005 alle 18:58 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG ha
scritto:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 11:14:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> >> also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.10.2300 +0200]:
> >> > Currently, I am planni
Steve Langasek wrote:
> Currently, I am planning to stick around for etch. If we're still waiting
> for etch two years from now, it's hard to predict how I'll feel at that
> point. :)
Ugh! However, that'd be still one year faster than sarge...
Regards,
Joey
--
Reading is a lost art n
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 06:58:35PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 11:14:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> >> also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.10.2300 +0200]:
> >> > Currently, I am planning to sti
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 06:58:35PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> Why not? The following seems like a reasonable plan to me:
>
> By the end of June, decide the release criteria.
>
> By the end of September, have the GCC changes in place and other
> infrastructural changes that we know we
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 11:14:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>> also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.10.2300 +0200]:
>> > Currently, I am planning to stick around for etch. If we're still waiting
>> > for etch two years from now,
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 11:14:02PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.10.2300 +0200]:
> > Currently, I am planning to stick around for etch. If we're still waiting
> > for etch two years from now, it's hard to predict how I'll feel at that
> > p
also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.10.2300 +0200]:
> Currently, I am planning to stick around for etch. If we're still waiting
> for etch two years from now, it's hard to predict how I'll feel at that
> point. :)
QUICK, ALL: this should be enough of a reason to get etch out i
casions to thank them again.
> Now, we probably all agree that releasing etch in 3 years is not the
> best thing to do.
> For this not to happen, we might need to have an already established
> release team for etch. Maybe the people currently involved in the
> release team as RM and a
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 03:29:41AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Christian Perrier wrote:
> > For this not to happen, we might need to have an already established
> > release team for etch. Maybe the people currently involved in the
> > release team as RM and assistant RM just
Christian Perrier wrote:
> For this not to happen, we might need to have an already established
> release team for etch. Maybe the people currently involved in the
> release team as RM and assistant RM just want to continue the hard
> work. Maybe some of you people just want to
.
For this not to happen, we might need to have an already established
release team for etch. Maybe the people currently involved in the
release team as RM and assistant RM just want to continue the hard
work. Maybe some of you people just want to get a break
Anyway, I think that we would all
29 matches
Mail list logo
