[Asterisk-Dev] stable/feature freeze?

[snacktime]

> >
> We could get ideas from debian, but obviously things would be different.
> We don't have 15000 different packages comprising an asterisk distro and
> we don't have a lot of different hardware architectures. With debian if
> a package builds and runs okay on the i386 arch but not on sparc it is
> considered a release-critical bug. There is a whole set of rules for
> moving things from unstable to testing and I think we would only need a
> small subset of those rules.
> 
> I think the goal should be to have a testing branch that encourages
> people to test. I have spare server hardware. If there were debian
> packages in an asterisk testing branch, I would be installing them on a
> test server and filing bugs(the type that maintainers appreciate). I
> might install testing on a production machine, but would never allow
> that one to be automatically upgraded. We only need to build for debian
> and the most popular rpm-based distros to get a lot more testers. With
> unstable a lot of users never get it built and running so the only thing
> they are testing is the makefile.
> 

For a project like this I'd much rather see a Freebsd type model. 
Especially since it's already similar in many ways.

IMO STABLE should usually be as stable as the last release, and new
features should not go in unless they get some decent testing.  Ditto
for bug fixes unless they are urgent, maybe security related.

More importantly I don't think that defining STABLE as a release that
is stable even makes sense.  It needs to be defined in terms of
policies and procedures, things you can quantify.  Like no new
features go in STABLE until being in HEAD for at least 2 months, etc..

Chris