On Thu, May 28, 1998 at 04:12:01PM +0200, Meskes, Michael wrote: > Sorry, now I don't understand. I think we should release twice a year. I really think this does not really fix the problem we're having now with hamm though. Trying to test and fix problems in EVERYTHING is a big task considering how big EVERYTHING is.. It's MUCH better IMO to have PACKAGES be stable and unstable. After a period of time (at least partially on the urgency of the package--not the priority) if there are no outstanding grave/critical bugs, the package can be moved into stable dist.. Every 3-6 months (more or less time if there is a real need) freeze stable for an official CD image to be made. This would allow what's done to be out and used by everybody, what's not done to get either noticed as not done and fixed, or left out of stable till someone decides that it's important enough that the bug doesn't matter (in which case the bug might just end up downgraded) I do suggest adding a new urgency, call it very_high or critical or whatever, it would essentially be used for things like new kernel patches fixing the latest IP exploit or other things that can't wait for the testing process in unstable.. This would make testing easier because it would break a large job into small parts, make the dist more of a community thing while still maintaining quality and getting new software out when there is reasonable assurance there aren't a number of seriously nasty bugs. Minor bugs are a fact of life, we deal with them.
Description: PGP signature