On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Mike McGrath wrote:
> > I'll admit, this is a convenient view to have. The problem is we're not
> > in high school anymore. We're professionals. We're expected to set and
> > keep schedules because people besides ourselves rely on those schedules.
> > There are other distros that set and keep schedules better then we do..
> > probably all of them. I'm just saying with proper planning it's possible.
>
> Huh? Name a distro which never has 1-2 week slips. Even Ubuntu with all its
> "reliable schedules" talk sometimes slips. The reason you don't notice is
> that they schedule for early in the month, so when they slip, it's still the
> same month and their y.mm versioning scheme still works. But one LTS release
> (Dapper Drake in 2006) has been made a .06 release rather than .04, that's 2
> months added to a 6 months schedule, and that was not the original schedule!
> So in some sense it was a 2-month slip! And Debian even routinely slips for
> months. As for RHEL, RH keeps its schedules secret until the very last
> moment, and rumors are the original schedule for RHEL 6 was already not met
> and it's still not out (but since I don't work for RH, I can't attest to the
> truthfulness of those rumors, and I guess those who theoretically could
> aren't allowed to comment on it).
>
> You have to choose between timeliness or quality. I'll take quality any day
> (as long as it doesn't get ridiculous like Debian's ages-long slips), thank
> you very much!
>
:( I'm saddened you think so little of us Kevin. I'd have thought we
could do both.
-Mike
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
