I think it would be good too!
My initial thought is that I would be interested in taking on this role.
Some initial ideas on requirements would be to make better use of our
stress testing suits before release and help with making sure to
mitigate regressions as well as to help make sure userland patches go
upstream so that software such as X or what not build for release thus
leaving more time to stabilise the kernel.
Cheers,
Edward.
On 28 October 2010 14:45, Venkatesh Srinivas <me@endeavour.zapto.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Aggelos Economopoulos
> <aoiko@cc.ece.ntua.gr> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/27/2010 09:32 AM, Sascha Wildner wrote:
>> > commit 1f8c7ab21b93617f611c5a4c5db45cb68a5e2d54
>> > Author: Sascha Wildner <saw@online.de>
>> > Date: ꀠWed Oct 27 09:07:13 2010 +0200
>> >
>> > ꀠꀠnrelease: Fix an annoying bug that was preventing the ISOs from
>> > booting UP.
>>
>> Does anybody else feel we should create a release manager role? It would
>> take some of the burden off Matt and Sascha is very methodical about
>> testing releases. I'm not suggesting anything too formal, just "you need
>> to consult with the RM for nontrivial changes to the release branch".
>> Matt would still decide when to create the branch of course.
>>
>> Maybe we should give that a try for the next release?
>
> I think this would be a really good idea -- there is a lot of work for 2.10
> that I'd call continuations of work in the 2.8 cycle, it'd be really nice to
> have someone to be watching the clock and to sync with about major changes.
> If people think its a good idea, we could possibly start by defining the
> role better?
> -- vs
>
>
--
--
Edward O'Callaghan
http://www.auroraux.org/
eocallaghan at auroraux dot org
---
()ꀠascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠꀠ- against microsoft attachments