On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote: > 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! > :( I'm saddened you think so little of us Kevin. I'd have thought we could do both. -Mike -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
