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
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
* 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
- 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 <firstname.lastname@example.org> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email: <email@example.com> | support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email: <firstname.lastname@example.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
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .