On Fri, Jul 23, 1999 at 10:51:07PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > Why can we not release "soon"? > > > > * Our boot disks don't work anymore > > If they don't, we can just stick slink's boot disks back in. It wouldn't > be the end of the world. Um. If you cannot use the rescue disk to rescue the system because of the difference in libc's, there's a problem .... > > * We need to fix the cdrom layout > > Doesn't seem earth-shattering, either. Reported as done too.. > > * We have almost THREE HUNDRED release critical bugs that must be fixed > > prior to release > > Careful, you're getting hysterical. What debian release has _not_ had > release-critical bugs? (*cough* dpkg *cough*) Have you looked at the > list? There's some stuff in there that's arguable, some stuff that can > be easily fixed by dropping packages from the dist, and some that > frankly aren't likely to be fixed. Most of the bugs I'm seeing are minor fixes. They NEED to be done. And I think I would probably leave the project in disgust before I allowed a release with THREE HUNDRED release critical bugs to be considered ready for the public's consumption. That's just IMO plain wrong. > > * The archive maintainers haven't had time to process the manual stuff > > in incoming for what feels like ages but is probably more like a > > couple of weeks > > I haven't seen anyone asking for help, so this must not be a crisis, > either. You don't hear Ian asking for help with dpkg but look at the number of bugs against it... Look at the date of the last upload he made to it too. > > * dinstall seems to be broken/breaking > > * Our mirrors are out of sync > > One follows from the other. Did I miss the plea for help on this one? The archive maintainers didn't make one. Everybody ELSE on the other hand, did. It seems fixed now. It's really not to wise to assume that just because the persons responsible for fixing a problem have not asked others for help does not mean the problem isn't bigger than they can conveniently handle as you assumed above. It's even less wise to assume that if they don't ask for help fixing the problem that there is no problem to fix as you do here. > > * We need a reasonable testing period after we've fixed the above > > Yay, someone else who's itching for a freeze! :-P I'm itching to see the problems fixed. WHEN (if?) they are fixed, I'll be happy to join you in itching for a freeze. Not before then though. I can see what dark is TRYING to do here. He wants us to freeze when we're done breaking things. This goes against tradition of a freeze announced ahead of time with lots of last minute uploads that screw us for 6 months while we TRY to fix all the new bugs created and having all out of date software by the time we DO release. If people make their last minute uploads and act like we've got a traditional freeze now, we'll get a release soon. So far, the silent majority is voting for the traditional last-minute-upload thing. I hope dark doesn't give in to the pressure to freeze soon whether we're ready or not... -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77 8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Signoff: Beregond (Klingon function calls do not have 'parameters' -- they have 'arguments' -- and they ALWAYS WIN THEM.) at 02:00PM
Attachment:
pgpdrY4IR21Vc.pgp
Description: PGP signature