Time-based freezes

[martin f krafft]

Dear release team members,

As far as I can tell, the press release during DebConf9[0] is still
taken to be the official position of the Debian project, at least if
I scan the pertinent media sources.

Luk's e-mail updates have not overly embraced the original proposal,
but the media does not read those, it seems.

We have a non-binding freeze date for squeeze in March, but I am not
sure if that is the beginning of the next cycle, or just in
anticipation of the 18 month release cycle that would have squeeze
come out in August 2010 (a five month freeze is long, but probably
realistic).

0. http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2009/msg00009.html

Would it be possible to get an updated statement? Will there be
regular freezes from now on? What period? I think we should issue
a press release about this.

Thanks,

--
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@...>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
"in the country of the blind,
 the one-eyed man is not king.
 he is taken to be a hallucinating lunatic."
                                                     -marshall mcluhan

[martin f krafft]

also sprach martin f krafft <madduck@...> [2009.10.26.1054 +0100]:

> As far as I can tell, the press release during DebConf9[0] is still
> taken to be the official position of the Debian project, at least if
> I scan the pertinent media sources.
>
> Luk's e-mail updates have not overly embraced the original proposal,
> but the media does not read those, it seems.
>
> We have a non-binding freeze date for squeeze in March, but I am not
> sure if that is the beginning of the next cycle, or just in
> anticipation of the 18 month release cycle that would have squeeze
> come out in August 2010 (a five month freeze is long, but probably
> realistic).
>
> 0. http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2009/msg00009.html
>
> Would it be possible to get an updated statement? Will there be
> regular freezes from now on? What period? I think we should issue
> a press release about this.

Any reaction to this?

--
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@...>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
have you drugged your kids today?

[Luk Claes]

martin f krafft wrote:

> also sprach martin f krafft <madduck@...> [2009.10.26.1054 +0100]:
>> As far as I can tell, the press release during DebConf9[0] is still
>> taken to be the official position of the Debian project, at least if
>> I scan the pertinent media sources.
>>
>> Luk's e-mail updates have not overly embraced the original proposal,
>> but the media does not read those, it seems.
>>
>> We have a non-binding freeze date for squeeze in March, but I am not
>> sure if that is the beginning of the next cycle, or just in
>> anticipation of the 18 month release cycle that would have squeeze
>> come out in August 2010 (a five month freeze is long, but probably
>> realistic).
>>
>> 0. http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2009/msg00009.html
>>
>> Would it be possible to get an updated statement? Will there be
>> regular freezes from now on? What period? I think we should issue
>> a press release about this.
>
> Any reaction to this?

This seems like an invitation to get whatever statement to attack.

What are the reasons you want an updated statement? The media coverage
on the time based freezes does not seem wrong to me or am I missing
something?

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Luk Claes <luk@...> [2009.11.11.1828 +0100]:
> > Any reaction to this?
>
> This seems like an invitation to get whatever statement to attack.

No, I wasn't going to attack anything. Sorry, I should have made
that clear maybe. I just want a baseline on which to formulate a new
press statement.

> What are the reasons you want an updated statement? The media
> coverage on the time based freezes does not seem wrong to me or am
> I missing something?

You mean apart from the media that missed the "freeze" part of the
regularity and think that Debian will be doing time-based
*releases*?

There are still media expecting us to freeze in December.

The media seem to think that what happened in July was officially
sanctioned (due to it being an official press announcement). Ever
since, a lot of discussion, the decision was reverted, and
a tentative freeze date announced. No announcement about any of this
was made, so you cannot really blame the media for assuming that the
goals of July are still current.

Does this make sense and explain my motivation now?

--
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@...>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
"vulgarity is simply the conduct of other people."
                                                        -- oscar wilde

[Luk Claes]

martin f krafft wrote:

> also sprach Luk Claes <luk@...> [2009.11.11.1828 +0100]:
>>> Any reaction to this?
>> This seems like an invitation to get whatever statement to attack.
>
> No, I wasn't going to attack anything. Sorry, I should have made
> that clear maybe. I just want a baseline on which to formulate a new
> press statement.
>
>> What are the reasons you want an updated statement? The media
>> coverage on the time based freezes does not seem wrong to me or am
>> I missing something?
>
> You mean apart from the media that missed the "freeze" part of the
> regularity and think that Debian will be doing time-based
> *releases*?

As far as I have seen it was not the message, but the title that was wrong.

> There are still media expecting us to freeze in December.

We did send another announcement [1] to rectify that.

> The media seem to think that what happened in July was officially
> sanctioned (due to it being an official press announcement). Ever
> since, a lot of discussion, the decision was reverted, and
> a tentative freeze date announced. No announcement about any of this
> was made, so you cannot really blame the media for assuming that the
> goals of July are still current.

There was another announcement [1].

> Does this make sense and explain my motivation now?

Not really. There was another press announcement [1] and as far as I've
seen the media used indeed sometimes wrong titles, but the focus if not
all of their message was around time based freezes and not so much about
any particular date.

Cheers

Luk

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2009/msg00010.html


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Luk Claes <luk@...> [2009.11.11.1859 +0100]:

> As far as I have seen it was not the message, but the title that was wrong.
>
> > There are still media expecting us to freeze in December.
>
> We did send another announcement [1] to rectify that.
>
> > The media seem to think that what happened in July was officially
> > sanctioned (due to it being an official press announcement). Ever
> > since, a lot of discussion, the decision was reverted, and
> > a tentative freeze date announced. No announcement about any of this
> > was made, so you cannot really blame the media for assuming that the
> > goals of July are still current.
>
> There was another announcement [1].
>
> > Does this make sense and explain my motivation now?
>
> Not really. There was another press announcement [1] and as far as
> I've seen the media used indeed sometimes wrong titles, but the
> focus if not all of their message was around time based freezes
> and not so much about any particular date.

Hm, strange. I cannot recall the article(s) that made me write my
initial message. It definitely seemed like this announcement was
never seen or absorbed by anyone. Maybe the two were too close to
each other.

So http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2009/msg00010.html
together with the announcement about a tentative goal March is still
current?

--
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@...>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
"those who are faithful know only the trivial side of love:
 it is the faithless who know love's tragedies."
                                                        -- oscar wilde

[Luk Claes]

martin f krafft wrote:

> also sprach Luk Claes <luk@...> [2009.11.11.1859 +0100]:
>> As far as I have seen it was not the message, but the title that was wrong.
>>
>>> There are still media expecting us to freeze in December.
>> We did send another announcement [1] to rectify that.
>>
>>> The media seem to think that what happened in July was officially
>>> sanctioned (due to it being an official press announcement). Ever
>>> since, a lot of discussion, the decision was reverted, and
>>> a tentative freeze date announced. No announcement about any of this
>>> was made, so you cannot really blame the media for assuming that the
>>> goals of July are still current.
>> There was another announcement [1].
>>
>>> Does this make sense and explain my motivation now?
>> Not really. There was another press announcement [1] and as far as
>> I've seen the media used indeed sometimes wrong titles, but the
>> focus if not all of their message was around time based freezes
>> and not so much about any particular date.
>
> Hm, strange. I cannot recall the article(s) that made me write my
> initial message. It definitely seemed like this announcement was
> never seen or absorbed by anyone. Maybe the two were too close to
> each other.
>
> So http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/2009/msg00010.html
> together with the announcement about a tentative goal March is still
> current?

Yes. March is not set in stone, though unless there are major reasons
(like a way too high RC bug count) not to, it will be the time we freeze.

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...