On Sex, 2016-11-25 at 20:32 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sat, 2016-11-26 at 02:24 +0000, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > Every release we got always tones of updates in day 0, on upgrades > > and > > non-live versions everyone will update the computer , if we use > > netinstall iso already include updates, only live versions could > > have > > breaks , but shouldn't be a better live version with the 500 > > packages > > updated ? > If we were going to do this, there would be no point having a freeze > in > the first place. It'd be absurd to have a freeze, then cut release > images that ignored it. > > The reason for the freeze is to ensure that *the install / deployment > processes themselves* are known quantities. Even if you do a network > install, the code in the installer environment itself is the release- > frozen code. It deploys updated packages, but the installer itself > does not *use* them. I'm not suggest cut release and ignore freeze, I'm suggest a second freeze to add last minutes updates and make a second freeze but in much less time, the goal is have a shorter freeze time or a second stable release, as we saw last 3 or 4 weeks of updates that was send to stable aren't in release. The idea of a post release is just add one more step of stability. -- Sérgio M. B. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
