On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 09:20:29AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Yes, it's mostly "PR bullshit", and I don't expect it to significantly > change Debian development processes. However, communication is necessary > if we want to attract new users. What might change is more attention > from developers to what happens in testing/rolling, which is probably a > good thing since a better testing/rolling makes it easier to create > stable releases from it.
Is that it, really? What's the point of the rename, forcing all the testing users to sed their sources.list? Wow. Useful. > [C] we could compromise. We could freeze rolling for 3 months, so that > most of the stabilization work occurs with a single active branch, > and then, for the final release preparation, fork 'frozen' off > 'rolling', and unfreeze 'rolling'. That's horrible to do because the end of the freeze is *exactly* when people get demotivated, and that the last rush is mostly done by very few people. Doing that will make them feel even more alone, which is a great way to burn them out even faster. I really don't like it. I'd rather see ways on how to make the freeze shorter been explored instead. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madco...@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110502073027.gb23...@madism.org
