* Aurelien Jarno ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070412 22:59]: > Basically it looks ok. What about the freeze period for the toolchain? I > think we usually suffer for a too early freeze of the glibc (it has been > frozen in July for Etch, even if it has been unblocked a lot of time > after). In my opinion, it would be better to freeze the upstream version > at that time and allow minor update until the main freeze.
Hm, we should consider how to do this better then. Basically, the main reasons for the freeze are: 1. We don't want to have stuff broken (and sometimes, even small and unrisky looking bugfixes have a devasting potential); 2. Packages related to the installer have their own specialities. We hope to reduce the impact of 2nd a bit during the release cycle (but not to none) - for 1st, I think it might be good to have some discussion on debconf (some ideas float in my head float like "longer default testing in unstable", "better patch review" or whatever - I think it might be a good thing to discuss that more in depth, and I hope we come to an result both the glibc maintainers and we like). Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
