On Mon, 09 Nov 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > critical" bugs. That gave to nice aphorisms like "release when > ready", but did not really cater to timeliness of the releases.
We are speaking of the freeze date, not the release date. > other way: Where timeliness trumps the quality. We also have release > goals; which implies that the release team likely to be looking at > other things than just dates: Release goals are not release blockers, I'm sure you know it. And luk is part of the release team, so he certainly took into account all the elements that he had. While it would be nice to have the number of RC bugs go in the right direction at the time of the freeze, it should not be a pre-requesite. When we're not in freeze, I mainly care of RC bugs on my packages or those that affect me as a user. During a freeze, I try to change my habits. I'm sure the same is true for others. Thus I believe that we should set a target date and respect it. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
