Re: PROPOSAL: "Staging Areas"
On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Hi.
>
> This is a good idea, but I have yet another idea:
>
> dists/stable
> dists/unstable
> dists/experimental
>
> i.e. move experimental above unstable and use it as the "staging area".
>
> Since apt is now widely used (and even if it were not), I don't think
> experimental needs the "symlink farm" unstable has. Everything would work
> smoothly if dinstall is modified so that any upload is allowed to
> experimental as long as the same package does already exist in unstable
> (this way, this would not require manual intervention from the ftp
> maintainers when a new package is uploaded to experimental).
There is, however, a technical advantage to having distinct staging areas
for specific projects, such as getting all of the gtk-* in sync.
OTOH, I certainly wouldn't be opposed to moves to make
project/experimental more straight-forwardly apt'able.
Apt gurus: How would apt feel about 'distributions' which had more than
one path component? E.g distributions being
{stable,frozen,unstable,dev/gnome,dev/experimental}. This allows to
emphasise to our users that, whilst they're free to use the dists in
'dev/', they are very much under development.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: