LFS-6.0 print process

Matthew Burgess matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Jul 7 12:19:06 PDT 2004


On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 19:53:18 +0100
Ian Molton <spyro at f2s.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 19:44:50 +0100
> Matthew Burgess <matthew at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
> 
> > > Too soon. there has been no testing.
> > 
> > Not true.  A lot of people have been testing, and following progress
> > in be-lfs on IRC.  Once this branch has been created then it'll be
> > more generally acceptable to more folks on this list to begin
> > testing.  I don't foresee many problems at all, if current
> > experience on IRC is anything to go by.  What is the point of the
> > 'testing' branch if not to encourage folks to test? 
> 
> No I was referring to the print fork - that should come from stable!

Well, I don't quite see how that would work in the Real World.  The
publishers won't want to print a book that has already been released
weeks before they can get it into the bookshops, bearing in mind their
lead times to get it back from the presses.  What I'd imagine will
happen is that the print "fork" will essentially be LFS-6.0, but then
we'll have to get the inappropriate changes (e.g. changelog,
etc.) reverted to release through our usual media (HTML, PDF, XML,
etc.).

Those "in the know" will be aware that a checkout of the print branch
once it's been frozen will have exactly what will be printed, but I'd
imagine the publisher's won't want us to officially announce the release
of the LFS-6.0 book until the printed copies are on the shelves.

I'd appreciate it if Gerard could clarify his and the publishers
positions on this though.

Regards,

Matt.



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list