On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava dijo [Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 10:08:13AM -0500]:
>> Based on Debian's last two releases, I think we have a 22 month
>> release cycle going; stretching it to 24 years is not a big
>> deal. Speaking for myself, I think have a predictable freeze date,
>> every two years, is a good thing.
>
> Umm... But the time from freeze until release is so far not
> predictable at all. Etch was way swifter than Lenny (or FFS than
> Sarge). They were all intended to be frozen for much less time than
> they ended up being. So… Freezing every 24 months (I won't even make a
> pun on your 24 years) can push us over the edge. Yes, I understand
> that this means the 24 months include the freeze time for the previous
> release. Still.
In the time line below, I am considering freeze of the toolchain
and base (d-i) as the start of the freeze, since we have not yet done
that for Squeeze). These are culled from the d-d-a archive, looking for
the mail announcing thte tool chain freeze.
sarge: 2004/08 - 2005/06 (10) (freeze in stages)
etch: 2006/08 - 2007/04 (5) 24 months between freezes, 22 for release
lenny: 2008/07 - 2009/02 (7) 21 months between freezes, 22 for release
squeeze: 2010/?? -
This is different from the time line AJ posted, since I am
counting from the time we froze toolchain/base packages, since as far
as I know the tool chain freeze date has not been announced.
So it seems to me that we have pretty much stable interfreeze
and ihnter-release cycles, and which is why I think we can manage to
sustain 2 year release cycles.
manoj
--
You will lose an important disk file.
Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
