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!
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
