/me wanted to reply to the proposal right after it had been posted, but
didn't get around to it
On 12.11.2008 19:46, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 19:30 -0500, Brian Pepple wrote:
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 16:11 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
<snip>
I'd like to see some conversation on this (or none if you all agree with
me) and a conclusion met within the next 2 weeks, that is at or before
the release of Fedora 10.
Just to make it obvious: I really dislike the idea, so it gets a strong
"-1" from me.
Looks pretty reasonable to me. My big concern is if we slip for F11
(which given our past track record is fairly likely) we'll be reducing
the F12 development cycle even more.
This reasoning is exactly why we decided a few years ago that the dates
(May Day/Halloween) were to be the target dates always.
It is (and iirc was) just one of the reasons (albeit likely the most
important ones).
If a release
slips, we realign the next one to what it should been targeted with.
Yes, it means a shortened window in this case for F11, but the
predictability it adds is significant and if F11 slips, the impact to
F12 is lessened.
Otherwise, we're really saying that the release date of release n+1 is
release n's date + six months (which is what we used to do). And the
problem with that is that any slips over time meaning that we end up
running into major holidays for a release date and have to have a
long/short cycle to reset things.
Which made a lot of people unhappy often -- for example at the time when
we skipped a gnome-release. A lot of people back then complained that
Ubuntu took all the glory for (Gnome) Features that had been developed
mostly by RH engineers, but first shipped in a Ubuntu release.
CU
knurd
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
