On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:42:30PM +0100, Sylvain Beucler wrote: > I think there's a problem when new packages also adds new RC bugs, > thus delaying the release. But in that case we could just drop the new > packages. Noticing this and removing the packages costs time from the RMs. If new packages would be added in this stadium of the freeze, we would never release, because the RMs would be busy with all the new packages all the time. > We'll definitely have a solution by Lenny+1 - including the fact that > our new packages will probably be integrated by then :) Of course we'll have other new packages by then. ;-) > But do we have solutions for people to simply install those new > packages? (aside from using another distro) If you think it's really important, you can set up your own repository, which hosts those packages. Then users can simply set up their package manager to include it, and install them. Personally, I think that any package which is important enough to get that kind of attention would be let in by the RMs. Games certainly aren't. The whole point of Debian stable is that things are well-tested and known to work in combination with the rest of Debian stable. Inserting new packages at the last moment can break things (as explained elsewhere). Users of Debian stable think it is ok to wait for the next release to get the new packages. If they want something else, they use testing or unstable, or an other distribution. > Let's not disregard solutions just because they come from other > distributions. No, that's not the reason. The reason is that we have much harder demands of our stable releases than Fedora does. People who want Fedora-style stability (and features such as new packages) should use testing or unstable. > Is there some documentation about these different states of the > freeze, or was it some dynamic decision (i.e. not the standard > procedure)? I don't think it's really documented; certainly not in Policy. On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 07:53:52PM +0100, Richard Hartmann wrote: > > Well, in Fedora you can retro-add packages to the last 2 releases > > pretty easily, so it can't be this bad ;) > > Debian stable does not mean the system is stable. It means that > the package set is stable. Actually, IMO it also means the system is as stable as we can get it. Having a stable package set is (part of) the way to accomplish that. > Non-command-line-savvy users who use stable on the Desktop will > > 1) not have the right to install any games Most desktop users own their computer, and will have the rights. > 2) have someone who does stuff for them That used to be true, perhaps, but (IMO at least) shouldn't be required. We do want our system to be usable without help for people who can use other computer systems, don't we? > 3) not care about much non-work-related stuff Since we're talking about people who would want to play games, this group is not relevant, indeed. > Desktop users are generally encouraged to use testing, anyway. > At least that's what I see in the IRC channels and what I tell people > who ask me IRL. I used to advise people to use unstable. However, I changed my mind for one (IMO) very good reason: updates to stable don't ask questions. It's just a matter of clicking on install and the system has all new security bugs fixed. People who have testing ask me "it asks me what kerberos servers I should use, and I have no idea what it means; what should I answer?" Actually, that's after I look at the screen; what they ask me doesn't make anything clear, except the "I have no idea what it means" part. ;-) Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://a82-93-13-222.adsl.xs4all.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature