[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian's problems



On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 07:37:29PM +0100, Adrian Bridgett wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 08:23:53AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 13, 1999 at 06:25:33PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > [0] viz, a kind of semi-unstable that only gets packages added to it
> > >     if they're immediately releasable. ie, they don't break boot-floppies,
> > >     don't break CD-rom building, and don't have any release critical
> > >     bugs. See somewhere under http://www.debian.org/~ajt/ for some
> > >     ideas/discussion/proposal on how this might be made to work.
> So "non-important" packages only - no new libc6, kernel, etc??? 

No. Anything can and should be uploaded to `unstable'. Things only get moved
from `unstable' to `prerelease' when they're known not to break anything.

So libc7 only gets added if it doesn't conflict with libc6, eg. And even if
it does, interested parties can still just get it from unstable.

> The package pool (where collections of related, and potentially
> harmful/incompatible changes are done seperate from the tree - for instance
> the recent perl upgrade could have been done there - and then once all the
> perl packages had been upgraded the whole lot would be dropped into unstable
> on mass) is a good idea - unstable breaks for a few days rather than a few
> weeks.

No, this is different. The package-pool is a mirroring issue, so that
mirrors don't have to rm and redownload every single .deb, effectively
doubling the bandwidth requirements. The above are `staging areas'.

> I'd also like to see a sort-of half-way house between Incoming and
> unstable where newly installed packages sat for a few days to weed out the
> nasty bugs (and hopefully where the people are slightly more clued up so
> that you only get 3 identical bug reports rather than 10).

This is the prerelease/unstable idea.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgp9dQMKLFDht.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: