Re: A "progressive" distribution
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 11:02:31AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> ??? - packages auto moved to here after basic criteria met (e.g.
> in unstable for 2 weeks with no bug reports). can't remember
> what this stage was to be called.
i feel a need to write some more about this stage.
this is the workhorse of the package pools/rolling release idea, this is
where there will be the most work to be done, fine-tuning the criteria
(and probably the source of the loudest and longest debates).
there have already been several discussions on appropriate
criteria...some as simple as the "automatic after two weeks" example
above. others as complex as "manual, requiring endorsement by X number
by trying different criteria here, we'll eventually come to the ideal
compromise between stability and speed of release. we probably wont get
it right the first time around.
the tests here will mostly be regarding usability/stability of the
package, and how it integrates into the system - i.e. it will be driven
by user bug reports as most packaging bugs will have already been caught
by the dinstall process which moves packages from incoming to unstable
(which would check for dependancies and run a lintian test, holding or
rejecting packages which have errors)