[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: splitting experimental by arch?

Christian Schwarz writes:
 > However, we might consider having a few packages in unstable which will
 > not be included in the `frozen' distribution automatically, for example, 
 > if the upstream maintainers don't want us to include it in a stable Debian
 > release.

GNU gettext may be a perfect example, as it is in experimental just
because the upstream maintainer AFAIK doesn't wish it to be part of a

Maybe it would be simpler to have another level "between" unstable and
experimental, with:

* stable: you know what.

* unstable: things that will be automatically promoted the next stable
release, ie. they are mostly based on stable upstream.

* ongoing-work: things that may be one day promoted to unstable, but
cannot in their present state because the upstream is not ready for

Candidates are:
- Packages that are in a shape likely to change, and not widely
accepted (eg: gettext)
- "for comment" packages, as Jim calls them (eg: dtm, dhelp...)
- programs that have just changed in a major way (Manoj told about the
future of cvs-buildpackage, Jim about reimplementations).

* experimental: things that may break something (ie. alpha)

The split between ongoing-work and experimental has been thought of,
but ongoing-work should IMHO be distinct from unstable to make things

Yann Dirson  <ydirson@a2points.com>      | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email:     <dirson@univ-mlv.fr>      |     support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email:   <dirson@debian.org>      |         more powerful, more stable !
http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 | Check <http://www.debian.org/>

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 .

Reply to: