On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:48:17PM -0000, Paul Dufresne wrote:
> This is the same message as previous, reformated
Thanks. It looks a lot better. ;-)
> Well, I hate that when I begin to think, and think, and everything
> goes away. I can't sleep and I'd like to put these ideas, and
> eventually share these ideas with others on a Debian's mailing-list.
> But who am I to think that my ideas are worth to be consider? I
> don't know, I don't even use much Debian, and I am not a maintainer
> or nothing like that, I even never made a package. Who cares.
I think we can all empathise. I got into what I call my "coding-zone"
yesterday. From noon to 22:30 CST, all I did was code and test, the
ever cyclical process. When I was finally satisfied with my work, I
looked at the clock... and promptly decided that it was WAY too late
for me to be sitting at a computer at work! A stop at McDonalds and a
couple minutes later, I stretched out on my futon to watch a little
DragonBallZ and Outlaw Star. Good brain-dead cartoons; perfect for a
brain approaching shutdown mode.
> I heard on 'Weekly News' that stuff is being talk right now about
> how freezing should happens. I did not even read these messages, but
> my mind is riding...
You should read the message. ;-)
> I came to see the development of Debian, as a big dependancy tree.
...[snip]...
> How things should work, according to me? I am not exactly sure. I
> would probably suggest something like assembling complex objects:
>
> -let's have let's say four versions evolving simultaneously,
> v1,v2,v3,v4
>
> -each time it is decided, v2 becomes v1, v3 becomes v2, v4 becomes
> v3, and v1 is... discarded?
You should search the archives of debian-devel for information on the
package pools that have recently been set up. It's really quite nice,
and a step in the direction you're thinking of. Read up on Debian
policy, the developers references, and such from the devel site:
http://www.debian.org/devel
You'll get a much better picture of where things are heading.
Packages currently migrate from unstable->testing based on rules tied
in with the BTS, autobuilders, and time, of course. Ultimately, we
may see a similar migration from testing->stable, if the definition
for 'stable' is separated from the idea of 'releases' or 'snapshots'.
'testing' has gone past the 'proof of concept' lifecycle and is now
into 'production'. It seems to be running quite well. ;-)
> -everybody can ADD stuff, anytime, to any versions as long every
> packages on which it depends exists and they all accepts to be
> based upon them
This isn't really a fully evolved thought. Though you're on the right
track. The current security updates to stable operate on the basis
that updated packages are built in the stable distribution environment
so as to meet dependency requirements. Adding packages to a
distribution simply need to follow this same practice, they must be
built in the same environment as the current snapshot of that
distribution.
> -you can modify a package, as long as no one depends on it
That's a rather limited view.
> Is it a bad idea?
No, it's not a bad idea. Debian uses these principles to manage
packages TODAY. ;-) The system is implemented and evolving. If you'd
like to see more features or changes to the system as it is, send in
some patches. ;-)
--
Chad Walstrom <chewie@wookimus.net> | a.k.a. ^chewie
http://www.wookimus.net/ | s.k.a. gunnarr
Key fingerprint = B4AB D627 9CBD 687E 7A31 1950 0CC7 0B18 206C 5AFD
Attachment:
pgpI1zWBN9Wz4.pgp
Description: PGP signature