Back to 6 month schedule?

[Jesse Keating]

On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 18:53 +0200, David Nielsen wrote:
> Aren't you disregarding the fact that GNOME also has a release cycle
> that enforces a strict bugfix only period, meaning the risk we face
> having shipped every test release in Development of the famous baby
> eating syndrome is incredibly low.

But not low enough.  There are parts of the gnome release that seem to
not follow this.  Large changes in the last tarball including FEATURE
changes hit us with this last gnome release.  Remember things that
didn't make the release and were held out for later test updates.  Even
still it was a hellish couple of days for our gnome folks to chew
through the 'minimal' changes.  I was not comfortable at ALL with this
process.

> But it would still be nice to have plenty of time between the GNOME and
> FC releases - It would give us the option to ship the follow up GNOME
> 2.x.1/2 release which is normally better translated and has more bugs
> fixed.

So we move the problem from N to N+1 ?  (;

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20060523/15556d2d/attachment.sig>