Re: Back to 6 month schedule?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 12:54 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> Just curious what the targeted general schedule is, what FC6's
> concrete schedule is (e.g. if the general schedule is 9 month, why go
> 6 months for FC6?), and closely related to this, what the relationship
> RHEL5 to FC5/FC6 will be. 

FC5's 9(10, 11) month schedule was an experiment in adjusting the
schedule to see if it helped in our release.  While it did allow for
some larger changes to make it through, it multiplied the amount of
little changes at the same time.  It created a very bad situation for
those of us trying to do any kind of QA on the distro before it went out
the door.  For all those involved, we felt that the 9 month schedule
hurt more than it helped and we're back to the tried and true 6 month
schedule, with slips here and there (hopefully not).

Sorry for the confusion.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux