Re: splitting experimental by arch?
Hi,
>>"Raul" == Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com> writes:
Raul> [rather than a bunch of quotes, I'll just recap the points I
Raul> think I got: "Experimental" is for dangerous packages and those
Raul> with wild machine interface changes. Packages should be moved
Raul> from "Experimental" to "Unstable" when the package is ready, as
Raul> opposed to some phase in Debian's release schedule.]
I think you got that wrong. Experimental is for experimental
packages, some of which also happen t be dangerous. I agree about the
movement out to unstable.
Raul> Perhaps instead of "Experimental" this section should be named
Raul> "Dangerous"?
That would be as much of a misnomer as unstable is. Unstable
has been pretty darn stable -- it is running on a lot of production
platforms. As we *require* maintainers to run nstable, we should make
sure that alpha/non-functional/dangerous packages stay out of it.
Or are we sayig that debian development is for the rich (who
can afford multiple machines, and can have one be unreliable), or for
the intellectually challenged (who would run their primary machine on
an unreliable distribution)?
What about the concept of building packages on an unreliable
system? I say throw the really unstable/experimental packages out of
the misnamed unstable, and keep them in experimantal where they
belong.
manoj
who just owns one machine. A donation of $5000 shall make manoj
change his mind
--
After the correction has been found to be in error, it will be
impossible to fit the original quantity back into the
equation. --anonymous
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
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: