Re: 8.2 features status

# kleptog(at)svana(dot)org / 2006-08-05 15:49:33 +0200:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 06:25:35PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > I have heard you make this argument before, and it is just is not true.
> > Even Debian is moving toward a more formal structure as has FreeBSD. You
> > seem stuck in this world where everything is still 1994 and all FOSS
> > software is developed in academia.
>
> Debian moving towards a more formal structure? What I seeing is that
> they're trying to get away from the having one person responsible for
> things to working in groups. What it amounts to is simplifying the
> rules to doing someone elses work. People who don't like it leave and
> you hope you're left with a more efficient group.
>
> The links you provide are mostly about handling releases. To be honest,
> I think PostgreSQL's release handling is fine. But none of those
> projects tackles the issue of making sure certain things get done. If
> someone didn't do the work for getting GCC 4.1 working for Debian, then
> no matter how much of a release goal it was, it wouldn't happen...

Actually, the FreeBSD team does gather status reports from people
working on major tasks. Max Laier bugs current@ and hackers@ every
two months, [1] then publishes whatever came in. [2,3] They used to
ask for emails IIRC, now I see there's a report submission form on
the web. [4]

[1]
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-current&m=115126459006810
[2]
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-current&m=115265674914807
[3] http://www.freebsd.org/news/status/
[4] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/monthly.cgi

--
How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb?
You don't know, man. You don't KNOW.
Cause you weren't THERE. http://bash.org/?255991