Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > [3] http://www.fs.tum.de/~bunk/Debian/freeze
Reading the whole "Future releases of Debian" thread, I thought that the main idea was that Debian need a more 'readable' status for the next stable release. I propose to create a meta-package called 'release-status-sarge' that depends on packages (with version number) that we want to see in sarge. Each maintainer has to fill a bug report to include his package in the next release and explain why the release has to wait for this package (or/ and this version of the package). We can have different bug level for the importance to include the package or not. The release-status-sarge maintainer can then add the package in the Depends field with the version number and close the bug, or he (she) can tag the bug 'wontfix' and explain why the package will not be in the next release. He (or she) can also ask for moreinfo. Why a meta-package and not a virtual-package? If we have a meta-package, we can use 'grep-excuse' to see "who we are waiting for?", in addition with the BTS, it's a lot of informations. We can also submit other bugs against the release-status-sarge package, like "Too many RC Bugs" or any other information on why the release is nt ready yet. I think Adrian is right when he want more release. I think the idea of having a Debian release a year is not so bad, but I do not like the idea of a dead-line for Debian releases. I think that "Next release of Debian will happen when it is ready" should be a general way of thinking even in other areas! This does not mean we do not need a strict release plan, but I prefer to base the release plan on targets, not on dates. Clear release goals not a release date. Also, Debian has developed lot of interresting concepts, ideas and tools, my idea is just to use some of them, no additional development, to clarify stable release plan and goals to Debian users and even Debian developers. Any comments are appreciate, thank you for your time, Note: I could also call the proposal "Debian Release Unified Goals" but finally I don't think it's a good idea ;) -- Arnaud Vandyck http://alioth.debian.org/users/arnaud-guest/
pgpkrot1qJ0Cf.pgp
Description: PGP signature