* Frans Pop ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060727 16:41]: > On Thursday 27 July 2006 16:19, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > What happened during the Sarge release was that we were aiming all > > > the time to release ASAP. If you do that, you cannot really relax > > > your freeze selectively. > > > > Well, we're definitly not aiming to release all the time. :) > > I meant after the base freeze of course. The time from the base freeze > (including the kernel) to the actual release was very (too?) long. I am > talking about possibly deciding to relax the base freeze for a while if > there are major issues that will delay the release anyway. > Of course you'd have to be selective and test very carefully.
Well, the base freeze sounds (for me) mostly like: "We must be sure that update doesn't drive us further away from release." If there is an update e.g. in Mid of August where d-i is happy with, and the relevant team is sure that it is stable enough (and possible upcoming issues will be fixed soon enough), and it looks for us the same, I don't see an issue to block it. Like said earlier, there is one thing that's definitly worse than allowing an update in: Discussing about it a few weeks, backporting some fixes back and finally accepting it later. > Security updates are not a problem. We can handle that. I was talking > about a possible update to a new upstream kernel minor release. For that, I think there should be a some last date, which sounds to me currently like something in October. Until that, as long as d-i is ok, and people are carefull enough to not select a kernel "just because it's newer", there is no reason to not go ahead. Freeze doesn't mean "no updates possible", just "be way more careful now please". Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
