[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: fedora 7 schedule (was Re: Fedora 7 planing)



On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 11:13 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Jeremy Katz wrote:
> >> 3 is the only one that is guaranteed to ship a stable product without 
> >> causing a delay. 1 can also ship stable product without a delay, but 
> >> only if you know you can assign someone to do the work in a finite 
> >> timeframe. If 1 becomes "hope someone patches the feature" then 1 can 
> >> mean delay. 4 almost invariably means delay.
> > 
> > When we're talking about the kernel, though, 3 _isn't_ guaranteed to be
> > a stable product ;)  If you go back to a previous kernel release, then
> > perhaps you've just lost all the security improvements.  Or lost the
> > ability to support hardware that's been released in the intervening six
> > months since Fn-1.
> 
> Right, which is why most large pieces of software have a stable and 
> unstable branch...
> 
> You could always have a "special kernel exception" - better to have one 
> package that can screw you, instead of hundreds...
> 

What are the packages that cause slips? We've had a couple of slips on
almost every release, right? What are the causes?

-sv



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]