Re: Who should package&host a product?

["Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk>]

Chewie wrote:
  >Now, I want to point out a small detail in context.  "unstable",
  >"testing", and "stable" packages do not necessarily reflect the
  >stability or lifecycle of the software contained within.  I would
  >agree that alpha software, in and of itself, should probably not make
  >it in to the Debian archives... unless that is what you want.  Beta
  >software, on the other hand, has traditionally migrated into the
  >unstable distribution of Debian.  Take PostgreSQL for example.
  >Version 7 made it in to unstable, even though the PostgreSQL people
  >classified it's lifecycle as "beta" software.
 
But in retrospect that was a mistake, because there were subsequent changes
in 7.0 beta which required a database dump-and-reload.  For 7.1, I shall
put the beta debs up on a website and advertise them, but I shall not
upload to unstable until the 7.1 final release is available.

-- 
Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight                              http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
PGP: 1024R/32B8FAA1: 97 EA 1D 47 72 3F 28 47  6B 7E 39 CC 56 E4 C1 47
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839  932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
                 ========================================
     "For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the
      whole earth, to show himself strong in the behalf of 
      them whose heart is perfect toward him..."            
                                   II Chronicles 16:9