Re: An old idea, brought back to life
> I think what you're missing is a change in release philosophy. As it
> stands now, a release is an all-or-nothing proposition. Packages that
> aren't ready delay the release of packages that have worked reliably for
> months. What we could do instead is move packages into stable as they
> are ready instead of waiting until all of unstable is ready. This is
> especially useful for new packages, e.g., one that is released just
> after a freeze, and which might otherwise wait a year to make it into
> stable.
Similarly, i want to run a "stable" release of Debian, but
inevitably there is a small set of packages that i need to
upgrade past the "stable" version (either because of bugs or
because e.g. i want to start using newer features of a
compiler).
There is not, AFAIK, any obvious way that this should be done
currently. It would be nice if i could specify per package
whether i want that package to track the stable or unstable
branches.
(Note: "hold" isn't quite the solution, because it very much
need security bugfixes even for all my "stable" packages.)
Regards,
Zooko
Reply to: