Re: Criteria for experimental uploads

[Brian White <bcwhite@verisim.com>]

> > >     I think we need experimental for packages that are just that
> > >  -- thing which don't necesarily work, and only people who take their
> > >  their system's well being in their own hands use that package
> > Fine.  Put those packages into experimental PROVIDED that a version
> > already exists in unstable.  Otherwise the new, alpha, buggy,
> > install-this-and-your-system-will-surely-explode-providing-mortal-
> > injury-to-many-woman-and-children goes into unstable.
> 
>  I don't think so. Experimental has been a way to distribute things among
> developers without having to include them in the distribution.
>  Either experimental should go back to what it was, or a new section
> should be created. I suggest the former.

Also, "unstable" automatically becomes "stable" at some point and in that
users will expect everything to work.  I don't think we want to have to
search through and remove packages that are not ready.

I think "unstable" should be for packages that the maintainer figures are
in good working order or will be when the time comes to freeze for the
next release.

                                          Brian
                                 ( bcwhite@verisim.com )

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 the difference between theory and practice is less in theory than in practice



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .