added

CVS version numbers

english/News/weekly/1999/43/mail.wml: INITIAL -> 1.1

1 files changed, 143 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/english/News/weekly/1999/43/mail.wml b/english/News/weekly/1999/43/mail.wml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..acca966f1f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/english/News/weekly/1999/43/mail.wml
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+#use wml::debian::weeklynews::header PAGENAME="email"
+
+<a name=1>
+<B>October GNOME</B> for <B>Debian</B>:<P>
+
+<UL>
+<LI> <B>Debian 2.2</B> (a.k.a. 'potato') [not yet released]<P>
+	October GNOME is already included.<BR> Just make sure you select
+the 'GNOME Workstation' profile when installing.<P>
+
+<LI> <B>Debian 2.1</B> (a.k.a. 'slink')<P>
+  	Install procedure:<BR>
+	<UL>
+	<LI> make sure 'apt' is installed on your system.<BR> If it isn't, install it.<BR>
+ 	(you can download it from <A HREF="ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/main/binary-i386/admin/apt_0.3.10slink11.deb">ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/main/binary-i386/admin/apt_0.3.10slink11.deb</A>).	
+	<LI> add the line <BR><B>deb http://www.debian.org/~vincent/ slink-update main</B><BR>
+	 in your <I>/etc/apt/sources.list</I> file.<BR>
+	To do so, type (as root):<BR>
+	<I>echo "deb http://www.debian.org/~vincent/ slink-update main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list</I>
+	<LI> download and install the packages:<BR>
+	Using apt; type (as root):<BR>
+	<I>apt-get update</I><BR>
+	<I>apt-get install task-gnome-apps</I><BR>
+	You can also use dselect's apt method; just update source.list and then do an update in
+	dselect (and manually select which packages you want).
+	</UL>
+	<P>
+	You may also want to browse the complete
+<A HREF="http://www.debian.org/~vincent/dists/slink-update/main/binary-i386/">package list</A><BR>
+and choose to install extra packages individually by typing (as root):<BR>
+apt-get install <I>package-name</I> (ie: apt-get install gnumeric)<P>
+
+<B>Note:</B><BR>
+This repository will be updated from time to time to include the eventually needed bug fixes.<BR>
+So even after the update, you're encouraged to keep the ressource line in your source.list file,<BR>
+and to type <I>apt-get dist-upgrade</I> from time to time.
+<P>
+
+<LI> <B>Debian versions before 2.1</B> are not supported.<BR>
+	If you want October GNOME on your Debian 1.3 or Debian 2.0,<BR>
+you'll have to recompile them from source (either using the<BR>
+<A HREF="http://www.gnome.org/start/gnometar-new.phtml">upstream tarballs</A>,
+or from the <A HREF="http://www.debian.org/~vincent/dists/slink-update/main/source/">
+Debian source packages</A>).<BR>
+
+</UL>
+
+-- Vincent Renardias &lt;vincent@debian.org&gt;  Fri,  5 Nov 1999 17:44:03 +0100
+
+<hr>
+<a name=2>
+<pre>
+To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
+Subject: Adam Di Carlo's Rationale (was Re: FREEZE RESCHEDULED)
+References: <19991107131936.A1352@xs4all.nl> <l4u2my2xe7.fsf@laminaria.rahul.net> <382594DC.1CAD2BE3@by.net> <19991107183854.B281@paradigm.rfc822.org> <38267D5C.C3FA293A@by.net>
+From: Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com>
+Date: 08 Nov 1999 21:26:14 -0500
+
+Included is a justification for the delay in freeze that I sent to the
+slashdot forum.  This is the first time I ever posted there, but I'm
+worried about becoming the most hated person in Debian.  Anyhow, I'm
+posting it here in case people wanna read it.
+
+Let me just preface this by saying that I agree with those who say
+that a 2 month delayed freeze with a 1 month cycle (if we can achieve
+that) is going to be better than a 3 month freeze.  For the developers
+here, I hope that you hold back uploading very unstable packages until
+after the potato release.
+
+-- 
+.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
+
+Anyone who's been watching Debian for more than 1 year knows that
+freeze time is a huge strain on the project.  The release manager,
+Richard Braakman, has stated his wish that the complete duration of
+the freeze should be no greater than 3 or four weeks.
+
+My discussion with him regarding the preparedness of the
+boot-floppies, in particular, is just to make sure he has all the
+information he needs to make this wish into a reality.  The whole
+point is to go *into* the freeze with a feature-complete and
+beta-ready installation system; with that in place, a 4 week freeze is
+plausible.  Without it, it's not.  For those who remember the slink
+freeze, that was about a 16 week cycle (it froze in mid-Nov, release
+in mid-March), and was quite stressful to all.  Our goals is that
+freeze is predicated on a pretty stable set of packages, which makes
+our own ability to test installation from scratch and slink to potato
+upgrading in a more sane fashion.
+
+[FYI, my current estimate is that we will have a feature complete
+boot-floppies by Dec 1.  I can state with some conviction that by 1
+Jan 2000 we'll have what I'd call a "release quality" boot-floppies
+(i.e., has undergone much testing; may still have documentation to be
+done).]
+
+Let me just cover a few other points, quickly.
+
+* The main reason why I want more time for boot-floppies features to
+go in is that I feel these features are very important.  Let me
+mention them briefly: a new task/profile selection mechanism, with the
+means to continue to use these mechanisms even after installation; use
+of apt in almost all cases [for package acquisition; yes, I know there
+are cases with SOCKS proxies and other obscure situations where this
+might not be a reality]; an apt configurator, with the capability to
+autosense official cdroms in expected locations; ability to install
+base2_2.tgz via http and maybe ftp; bootp/dhcp network data population
+when available; X package installation hand-holder, able to autosense
+your correct X server package.  I feel these advances are important.
+Even with the delay, I hope we have time to implement them.
+
+* Those who say we'll never freeze are just talking crazy.  We have a
+lot of desire to update and obsolete the slink distribution.
+
+* Regarding Linux 2.4, no, we do not plan release cycles around Linux
+release cycles, which should be clear to anyone.  For better or worse.
+Assuming Linux 2.4 is stable (2.2 wasn't that great w.r.t. stability
+when it came out, IMHO) and comes out in the next couple of weeks, I
+wouldn't rule out 2.4 for sure.  Right now, we're planning on using
+2.2.13 (although that can very for our 5 different architectures).
+
+* We do realize that the current release engineering mechanisms are
+showing the strain of how large the project has grown.  There are two
+approaches to this problem: (a) do more "point releases" of the stable
+system, which simply requires a larger team than we currently have
+worrying about stable even after it's released; (b) radically
+reengineer release management, where the most likely candidate for
+this is the "package pool" proposal -- I don't have the URL offhand.
+
+* Even with all that being said, I'd like to reiterate that, AFAIK,
+Debian is the only distribution with a proven and robust way to
+upgrade your distribution (whether it's for new releases, picking
+packages out of unstable, or whatever).
+
+* While we're in the "excuses" department, I don't think there are
+many out there that realize how much effort it is to coordinate Debian
+in general (or boot-floppies, for that matter). This work goes on
+behind the scenes, and some of you interpret the slow-moving nature of
+these issues as indifference.  I can assure you we are not
+indifferent, especially to the criticisms regaring frequency of
+release and the quality of the boot-floppies.
+</pre>
+
+#use wml::debian::weeklynews::footer