On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 01:50:19PM -0700, Chris Waters wrote: > I think the history of Debian speaks for itself -- we make a quality > distribution by doing the Right Thing, even if it is sometimes > controversial (note, for example, that X4.2 is still not in unstable).
That is not comparable, X4.2 is still not in unstable because Branden did work on 4.1 until months after 4.2 was released. This is one of the things that gives us a reputation of releasing with obsolet versions of stuff, and a think we have no reason to be prud of. I don't blame Branden, but i think that if he had known there would be so much time back then when 4.2 was released, back in january, maybe he would have worked on 4.2 instead, i don't know, anyway, i think this is not a good example, as the decision of staying with 4.1 was somewhat controversial (well, at least there were lot of people who did not understand) and an artefact of the long woody release cycle. Now, woody was just released, and sarge is at the very begining of its development cycle, so we cannot say we will keep gnome1 out of unstable because we think it will not be ready when sarge is releasable, as Branden did say for X4.2. And BTW, i did need to upgrade my Xlibs to 4.2 when installing gnome2, because of the Xft bug, altough i have a full developpment XFree86+DRI installed (dated from early july). So maybe the fact that X4.2 is not in unstable _is_ a good reason to not migrate gnome2, altough it makes things difficult. Friendly, Sven Luther
