An old idea, brought back to life
Ben, did you hear a proposal made by someone, I think Anthony Towns was
part of the discussion if not the person who was suggesting it (someone
will correct me if my memory is in error), that unstable become a never
released distribution?
The idea was that unstable is always unstable. As packages became stable
they would be moved to a release distribution which is always kept (or at
least there is a reasonable attempt to keep it) as stable and as close to
release as possible.
The idea being that when we decide we're ready to release, we freeze for
a couple weeks, maybe a month if things don't go smoothly.. Durring that
time we put it through final shakedown and hopefully very soon release
it. The key to making it work being that we would be trying to keep it
as stable as possible all the time so it could be released when we were
ready.
What is your take on this sort of system (I think it'd be kinda neat if
we could do it without imposing nasty policies and testing regimes and
the like making it difficult for packages to be considered release
candidates and be allowed to remain that way. I disagreed at the time
with the policy the person suggesting it had in mind which seemed kinda
harsh.
I'd also like Wichert's opinions on this as I thought then and think now
that this could hold some promise if implemented carefully. Just one of
many suggestions I have heard for possible archive restructure. This was
BTW from the days before I was a developer. Wasn't afraid to be
opinionated then either. =>
--
"Shall we play a game?" -- WOPR
Reply to: