Release management thoughts for Dapper Drake

[Jeff Waugh]

<quote who="Scott James Remnant">

> So a sync of coreutils would be an effective no-op, and probably should be
> done simply for Debian Relations and to reduce our burden when we come to
> open elegant elephant or whatever dapper+1 gets called ;)

That's core-utils *now*, not core-utils at UVF (and was using core-utils as
an example). Again, sync and merge isn't the problem, it's the general churn
of all packages between releases.

> I'm not saying your idea (continue UpstreamVersionFreeze) isn't a bad one
> in the pure Release Management sense -- I'm saying that your picking on
> the wrong bloody things!

Sure, I understand the things we're likely to exclude are things that change
in more significant ways - but we'd exclude those *knowingly* and have more
time to concentrate on them specifically, due to reducing the rest of the
churn.

I'm not saying that I think the churn is enormous and terrible - we can cope
with it, as we have with every previous release. But commonality between
breezy and dapper gives us more opportunity to find and kill bugs in this
relativly boring set of packages.

- Jeff

-- 
EuroOSCON: October 17th-20th    http://conferences.oreillynet.com/eurooscon/
 
    "You know, it's not that unusual, even in Hollywood, for brothers to
         work together. Heard of the Warner brothers?" - Ethan Coen