Re: I'd like to coordinate a major update of stable
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> Whatever happened to the idea of having pools of package
> (presented by aj)? The idea was that packages always be uploaded to
> an unstable ``pool'' of packages. After meeting vertain criteria
> (minimuym time in unstable with no bugs, or no important bugs,
> indication from maintainer that they are ready to be moved from the
> unstable ppool), they would be moved to a staging area (that would
> allow packages to be moved only when dependencies are all satisfied).
> Then, packages are moved from the staging area to the stable pool.
I would second that at once I think, if I could. :(
That would also resolve the problem of broken dependencies to
binary-all packages or missing source codes (which si in violation to
the GPL) for non i386 archs.
> That would give us a continually updates set of stable
> packages (with no, or few, release critical bugs) that can frozen
> and released at will.
I would like that for unstable and call the pool experimental or
untested. Only Packages that are proven to work with the current
unstable by 2-10 people should be allowed in. The bug system could be
used to tell when packages work.
Stable should still be frozen, since its burned onto CD's and should
have stable Version numbers. All potato CD's should be identical and
chaning the name on a weekly bassis isn't going to work.
SuSe updates the contents of their CD's without changing the Version
of the Release, which confuses and anoys people, debian should not do
that as well.
May the Source be with you.
Goswin
Reply to: