On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:25:48PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > >> Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were > >> working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons, > >> and freezes were shorter. > > > > That's not true (unless you are talking about something that was ceased > > several years before testing became live, certainly before I started > > following Debian development in 1998). Before testing the RM used to > > fork unstable into a "frozen" distribution. Unstable was still open for > > development, and heated arguments developed on this very list asking > > that the process be changed so that unstable would be frozen; this was > > never done. > > > > I don't know what you mean by "pretest cycles with bug horizons". > > > > You are correct. It seems so old to me that I didn't even recall > it was a fork. This indeed explains why that process had to > be improved. It also explains why the current process needs to > be improved as well. > > Thanks to Ubuntu, we now have a good example of what's proven > to work. >
I think it is premature to declare that Ubuntu's model works any better than what we're currently doing, in the long run. regards Andrew -- linux.conf.au 2005 - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - Birthplace of Tux April 18th to 23rd - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - LINUX Canberra, Australia - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - Get bitten!
