no ... *really* ... any ETA for updated beta?

[Gerald Henriksen]

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:26:25 -0400 (EDT), you wrote:

>On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Pat Gunn wrote:
>
>> 3) There happens to be a lot of important software that's near its next
>> 	major release right now, and it makes sense for RedHat to do some
>> 	delays in order to make sure that 9.1 will have the current stuff.
>
>this brings up an interesting point.  what does it mean to say you're 
>doing a beta test if the final release may contain newer releases of
>software that are not in the current beta?
>
>that is, some interpretations of the word "beta" imply that a feature
>freeze is in effect, which might also include upgrade freezes.  

Once the first beta is released Red Hat will make major changes only
if a good case can be made.  Otherwise the version that is in the
first beta will be the version in the final release (plus any bugfixes
found through the beta process).

The only previous instance I can recall for a major change during a
beta was the gcc 3.1 -> gcc 3.2 change for Red Hat 8, which if I
recall correctly was deemed necessary due to a C++ ABI change.

>> I personally expect, when beta2 comes out, that the only thing that'll
>> be different when I install it is I'll perhaps have a 2.6 kernel,
>
>oooooh ... i'm not sure that's going to happen, but it would be nice if
>the 2.6 kernel source was at least somewhere on the CD.  i think there's
>still some work to do on 2.6 before it gets adopted, and i don't think
>that will happen before RH 10.  but i could be wrong.  no, no, wait ...
>no, i couldn't. :-)

I doubt 2.6 will be in any version of Severn.  Other than the fact
that the goal for 2.6 was cambridge++ the point remains that it is
doubtful that 2.6 will be released on time for the release of Red Hat
10, and I doubt Red Hat will ship with pre-release version of the
kernel.