[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnewsense-dev] New base for gNewSense 3

From: Sam Geeraerts
Subject: Re: [Gnewsense-dev] New base for gNewSense 3
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:43:33 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090824)

Karl Goetz schreef:
Hi all,

(CCing Robert, since I feel this is important to the work he has done).

After producing a lot of hot air [0] recently, I've decided to send
this email.

gNewSense 3 will be rebased from the current Debian stable, to Debian
testing, as soon as it is frozen by the Debian release managers.
Members of our community [1] have provided a huge amount of work
towards gNewSense, but based on Debian stable.

I have decided that the number (and variety) of backports has caused a
number of issues for package maintenance, and this outweighs the delta
we worry about when dealing with Debian.

The next Debian release is still in 'development mode', so (as a distro)
it is quite open to accepting patches. Now is the time for us to file
bugs and submit patches that we feel affect a gNS based on squeeze
(Debian testing), and to try and get them fixed.
I (personally) feel a responsibility to make gNS 3 the best release yet,
and a notable improvement over gNS 2.x[2]. I can't honestly say I feel
either of these goals would be met by basing on the current Debian
stable (as we do atm) with many and varied backports.

I agree.

I will be attempting to help the Debian project fix bugs which
prevent 'squeeze' (Debian testing) from freezing. I feel this is a
valid use of my time, as it directly affects the gNS 3.0 release, and I
encourage others to help Debian reduce its RC bug count[3].

Would it be useful to keep a (more or less) short list of RC bugs that are more important for gNewSense than others, so anyone wanting to help knows what to focus on? I'm thinking bugs that have to do with e.g. freedom issues, mipsel platform. That Debian list is still long, so it's easy to get lost in there.

[0] metaphorically speaking - I only email/irc :)
[1] Largely Robert Millan
[2] Since we don't (currently) officially support upgrade from 2.x to
3.x, this is particularly relevant.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]