On Thu, 12 May 2011, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 05/12/2011 10:09 AM, Craig White wrote: >> On May 12, 2011, at 2:05 AM, Ron Blizzard wrote: >>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Mark Bradbury <mark.bradbury at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Do you expect the C6.0 -> C6.1 differences to be more complex, or less >>>>>> complex than the C5.5 -> C5.6 differences ? >>>>>> >>>>>> And given that C5.6 took 3 months, are there any reasons why C6.1 would >>>>>> take no more than 1 month ? >>>>> >>>>> Get over yourself Dag ... for goodness sake. >>>> >>>> Why? seems like a valid point to me. >>> >>> But at that time there should only be one point release on the table, >>> instead of two point releases and one major release. Is everyone >>> forgetting that 4.9, 5.6 and 6.0 were all out at the same time? >> >> 2 months elapsed from release of 6.0 before 5.6 and more than another month before 4.9 >> >> Hardly qualifies at the same time unless you consider 3 months to be essentially the same time. > > The ZERO release is always going to take longer than the others. Past numbers debunks this myth: CentOS 4.0 took 23 days CentOS 5.0 took 28 days CentOS 6.0 is not released after 6 months. While eg. CentOS 4.8 took 3 months CentOS 5.6 took 3 months See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS -- -- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- dagit linux solutions, info at dagit.net, http://dagit.net/ [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]