On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 10:26:24AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 10:58:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 03:51:51PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > > I don't think you'll find much argument with those points. It is a matter > > > of determining what needs to be done in order to achieve this goal, and > > > doing it. > > > > I stated in my initial mail "... as long as my time permits I'm willing > > to help in QA and/or release management if this results in a new stable > > release within clearly less than a year.". > > > > This offer is still valid. > > And as I stated above, I think at least half the problem is determining what > needs to be done. Have you any suggestions?
If I were release manager, I'd do the following: - start to collect a list of thing that need to be done for Debian 3.1 or that were "nice to have" (e.g. a port to amd64 would be nice to have, but shouldn't delay the beginning of the freeze much) together with estimated dates when something on this list will be finished - post a plan on how the freeze will work; my old idea was [1] (today I'd suggest a few details different) At about a week later the following could be done: - set a fixed date for the beginning of the freeze - send the final plan on how the freeze will work (some things like bug squashing parties can begin before the beginning of the freeze) There are many ways how a freeze might work, the most important thing is that every maintainer knows what has to be done and at which date his packages have to be in a releasable state. > - mdz cu Adrian [1] http://www.fs.tum.de/~bunk/Debian/freeze -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
