On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 12:00:09AM +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote: > El sáb, 01-10-2005 a las 17:10 -0400, Alejandro Bonilla escribió: > > On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 15:51:10 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 01, 2005, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote: > > > > > > Could you please comment on the schedule(s) I posted? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > I´m no debian developer, but I think that is a waste of time of fixing a > > version that will not be used in 2 months. etch willprobably go with > > something like gnome 2.14 and Sid should not have something when there is > > already a new version of it. If you want to move gnome 2.1* to etch, then > > move 2.12 and not 2.10. Is a waste of time. I would just jump right to 2.12 > > forget 2.10 bugs and then get 2.12 nicely and then move it down to > > etch/testting. > > Yes, I agree with Alejandro. GNOME has a fixed release schedule and we > don't. And though we can think that we are going to release in 18 months > from Sarge release (which would be great), spending a lot of time in > 2.10 is a waste of time, as for sure Etch is going to be released with > at least 2.12. If we were just 2 months far from release, making this > would be acceptable, but not just now. > > With this, I am not saying that GNOME 2.10 should be abandoned, but > that 2.12 should start to be packaged and uploaded. Or it will happen > that closer to our release, GNOME 2.14 is going to be released and we > will want to include it in Etch, forcing people to jump from 2.10 to > 2.14, which usually is more difficult and errors prone.
BTW, i hear t-p-u is finally unfucked (but then maybe i am misinformed), so would this not be the time to upload 2.6.12 to unstable, work on the etch 2.6.10 version through t-p-u, and so finally find out if t-p-u is a useful thing or just some vaporware that nobody is ever going to use ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
