On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:32:12PM +0100, Maximilian Attems wrote: > On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:02:05PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 09:24:19PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > N-117 = Mon 30 Jul 06: freeze essential toolchain, kernels > > > > Why do you put the kernel together with the essential toolchain freeze, it > > should be together with the rest of base, i believe. > > the kernel is an essential piece of our release, > makes sense to have it in tune with everchanging userspace interfaces > (alsa, udev to name a few).
Indeed, that is why it is part of base, but putting it in comparison with the toolchain (glibc, gcc, etc) is overkill. > > > N-110 = Mon 7 Aug 06: freeze base, non-essential toolchain (including > > > e.g. cdbs) > > > N-105 = Mon 14 Aug 06: d-i RC [directly after base freeze] > > > N-45 = Wed 18 Oct 06: general freeze [about 2 months after base > > > freeze, d-i RC] > > > N = Mon 4 Dec 06: release [1.5 months for the general freeze] > > > > We will have a kernel which is outdated by two versions at release time with > > this plan, since there are about 1 kernel upstream release every 2 month. > > we had the chance for sarge, but we weren't ready. Due in big part to the messed up kernel situation we inherited from in sarge, remember i proposed delaying sarge to get the unified kernel infrastructure :) > for etch we will work for our best to be ready. indeed. > please don't rush out such mails without consensual position. like bow and smile and wait forever ? This is not i believe the debian way of handling things, and i am certainly not the only one taking this kind of approach, and much more involved and whatever DDs than me have done it like that, so ... Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
