On 04-Jan 09:45, Steve Greenland wrote: > On 04-Jan-05, 07:40 (CST), Paul van der Vlis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One of the biggest disadvantages of Debian for me is the long time it > > takes for a new stable version. > > If you want Ubuntu or Progeny, you know where[1] to find them. :-) > > Seriously. There's just no way you're going to change the way Debian > makes releases, or rather, doesn't. It's too big, and there are just > too damn many people involved, many of whom simply don't care about > releases. As long as we maintain our current release criteria (which I > don't necessarily think we should change) we will get slower and slower > as we get bigger and bigger. > > Steve > > [1] Okay, just in case you don't: http://www.ubuntu.com/, > http://www.progeny.com
How large of a change would it be to switch to a goal based releases? More along the lines of "new installer for sarge" and once all release goals have been met tag a release and only accept new packages that fix RC bugs. or Use popularity-contest results to find a "core" set of packages and make a release more time based, but only count RC bugs from those "core" packages (Maybe those packages that would fit on 2 CDs?) Debian is a great distro, but I can't really use it anywhere other than a static server (and even then woody's SpamAssassin is much too out of date to be usefull.) If an organization _needs_ the security and stability of hopefully^W historic debian release, than there is Progeny or decent admins to keep things running. It would be nice if testing really was "Testing" a whole set of packages where with every new release it was quickly switched to a new snapshot of Sid, or Sid when some major release goals where met. Thomas
