Bug#154950: Thoughts on GNOME 2 transition
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 09:18:17PM +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> That, indeed, is the crux of the argument. We don't want to put stuff
> without *2 in unstable because it means no one has an option whilst we
> perfect the migration stuff. That's why we mostly settled on maintaining it
> all outside unstable during the meeting, despite the inefficiencies.
I agree with Joey Hess here. If people wanted an option, they'd run
stable, testing, or just pay attention to what apt was upgrading. I know
I do. If you run unstable you have to be prepared to do that. Having *2
is ugly and hard to undo without stub packages other hideosities. If
we're going to remove GNOME 1,4 desktop before release, then we should
just remove the damn thing, put in the new versions, and then try and
smooth the upgrade path. Can someone rubber stamp this and juse let us
get on with it?
> - Jeff