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

Re: 2.4.0!



Maybe we could make a distinction between

1. Upstream software (which has already gone through a lot of testing
upstream and sidestreams in RH, SUSE etc). It is highly unlikely that such
software will contain major bugs. There could be configuration problems.

2. Debian native software which needs extensive testing. This would
include debconf, packaging tools, boot floppies, special scripts and other
native packages. Native software might only be testing within Debian and
is therefore much more fragile.

On Fri, 26 May 2000, Richard Braakman wrote:

> On Thu, May 25, 2000 at 03:44:00PM -0700, Erik wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2000 at 10:20:01PM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> > Well, i dont see XF4.0 getting in, but i almost wish debian would not take the
> > attitude of 'all packages are equal,' in what gets in.  IMHO it is perfectly
> > fair for a package that a general concensus of linux users feel is an 
> > 'important' to get special privlages, like being inserted in the middle of a
> > freeze.
> 
> The implication is that packages that are generally considered 'important'
> need less testing.  I don't buy that.  Something like a new gnome or
> a new XFree will need *more* testing than the average package, not less.
> They are also highly complex packages.
> 
> Richard Braakman
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 
> 



Reply to: