Re: Bug#720108: Please upload 0.3.3 to unstable
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Josh Triplett <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 01:36:21AM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Josh Triplett <email@example.com> wrote:
>> > Package: supertux
>> > Version: 0.1.3-3
>> > Severity: wishlist
>> > The supertux 0.3.x series has been in experimental for years now. Any
>> > reason not to upload it to unstable?
>> No reason, aside from that's the state the package was in when I first
>> adopted supertux.
>> If we were to change this, I'd be more inclined to go with Ubuntu's
>> approach here, i.e. package both and let users have the choice to
>> install one or both at the same time. In Ubuntu, they have
>> src:supertux which builds binary packages supertux and supertux-data
>> (from the 0.3.x branch), and src:supertux-stable which builds binary
>> packages supertux-stable and supertux-data-stable (from the 0.1.x
>> branch). No file conflicts are introduced (supertux 0.3.x installs
>> /usr/games/supertux2, whereas supertux 0.1.x installs
> What's the rationale for maintaining both branches, rather than just
> dropping the 0.1.x series completely?
Because upstream considers the 0.1.x series to be "stable", and 0.3.x
as the "unstable" development branch. I think that it's time to push
users to the 0.3.x series by default (that would be what "apt-get
install supertux" pulls in by default in sid with this change), but
leave 0.1.x available to users as an option.