Re: [internal-projects] [Debian-multimedia] Start an official internal project!
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 12:01:51PM +0100, guenter geiger wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> > Ah sure, deadlines and free collaborative softwares live on different
> > worlds. This is a fact. None knows now when next stable kernel 2.6.0
> > will be available. None can know this for any other large project.
> > The only answer to this dilemma is branching.
> > Stable and unstable versions should be developed together.
> > So, double the efforts. Simple to say, hard to do, I know.
> I think we have to find a way in Debian to provide the features
> of a stable distribution and up to date applications.
Argh! I hope none would change release management policy. Frozen
release are frozen release. You cannot add new features to a
frozen release. Stop. We can discuss about how speeding up the
release cycle instead.
> Experience with backporting show that it is not to hard to do
> in most cases. There are backports of almost everything available
> on the net. X, Gnome, KDE, we just have to find a way to include
> these in Debian.
I don't know what are your experiences, but that practice is pain
with many big packages (due to multiple dependencies and changes
in features and policy)...
And this particularly true when
sid enter major changes processes (as currently for instance).
> > I could suggest you to ask DDs to support unstable releases;
> You mean building a distribution out of unstable ?
> Or are you referring to the specific packages we want to backport ?
I suggest to have the main development in sid.
Then backport packages to woody as needed.
> > you and demudi folks have to follow the stable branch instead
> > and work as a woody-related Demudi release manager, and also cohordinate
> > unstable ports. Some DDs could also help for woody backports, but
> > don't ask all to work on a frozen release. This is the only way
> > to normalize in respect with Debian path. This is what's done
> > for kernel. Work on unstable and backports.
> If there would be Debian official releases of backports it would
> make things easier, because most maintainers would be interested
> to have their application in the backported Debian part too.
> In several cases backporting is actually a noop. its just recompiling.
> Such a system would help Debian in general.
> Maybe we should provide the possibility to mark backportable packages,
> then it would be a matter of autobuilding only. Surely this way
> you get a lot of people testing too. Actually you amplify the
> base of users/testers this way, which in turn will be good for
> the unstable packages.
> > > Demudi has the same problems with Debian like everyone trying to build
> > > a user friendly distribution based on Debian had up to now.
> > >
> > Knoppix and other did this, sure. But they are another Project.
> > The key point, again is: should debian-multimedia be a sub-project or
> > another one? If you want live in a Debian world, you have to adopt
> > its way of life. That's all.
> ... or try adopt Debian to the way you want it to be.
> (I have to shut up now, better to write a proposal how this could be done)
Yep, but your proposal for a different debian release cycle should
be as general as possible.
Francesco P. Lovergine