Wouter Verhelst dijo [Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:57:13AM +0100]: > In my opinion, the best release we ever had (that I was a part of, at > least) was the Etch release process; shortly after Sarge had been > released, the release managers had started to regularly update the > project as a whole on where we were in the process, and I believe that > worked very very well. During the whole of the Etch release process, > there was never really a point in time where I felt I didn't know how > far away the release still was. > > It feels to me as though the frequency and/or quality of updates has > reduced somewhat since the Etch release, though I'll readily admit that > that is just a gut feeling. At any rate, I do not feel I am as > up-to-date as I was during the Etch release process on when the release > is going to happen. I don't think it's going to take more than, say, > half a year, though.
Hmm, you got me thinking here on why this happened, as I share your impression. Maybe it was because the project as a whole put more care into the release process after the massive pain it was to release Sarge, a three-year-long pain we didn't want to suffer again? For Lenny we lost some of that push, although the release process was still mostly swift, with a minor slip regarding what we expected. As for the reasons why we are not freezing yet... I think it is somewhat a lack of commitment to what the Release Team says, as (too) many people felt betrayed with the way the freeze-related announcements were made (a topic that has already been analized here). So, going back to the questioning of the candidates: Do you agree with this very simplistic analysis? If so, how would you push to get the drive and the confidence back? -- Gunnar Wolf • gw...@gwolf.org • (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100317035655.gb13...@gwolf.org