Re: Results of the meeting in Helsinki about the Vancouver proposal

[Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@gmail.com>]

On 8/22/05, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> In particular, we invariably run into arch-specific problems every time
> a new version of a toolchain package is uploaded to unstable.  Some may
> remember that the new glibc/gcc blocked non-toolchain progress for
> months during the beginning of the sarge release cycle, and that the
> aftermath took months more to be sorted out.  So far, etch threatens to
> be more of the same; in the past month we've had:

I've been wondering, why isn't the new toolchain tested and the
resulting errors fixed before it's uploaded to unstable or made the
default?