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

Re: Proposal: Why not use testing-proposed-updates?

On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 11:27:43PM -0500, Mark Eichin wrote:
> >  * Testing is popular and with increased usage comes increased
> >  demand
> This was certainly feared when testing was created.  Does effort on
> making testing a more supported day-to-day release do anything other
> than detract from getting it out the door?

We did worry about this when we were initially discussing the whole
idea. I think that the overall aim at present is to get testing to a
point where it's good enough to release as "stable". Making testing more
supported (in terms of trying to provide another mechanism to fix bugs
in it) can only help us acheive this goal.

A "testing-proposed-updates" approach allows us to fix RC bugs in
testing even when the packages in unstable have a lot more bugs.
Otherwise you need to fix all the bugs in the unstable package to get
testing clean, which if it's a later version may not be so trivial.
t-p-u should allow testing to be more easily brought to a releasable
state and also enables it to be a more cutting edge platform for those
who want a stable-ish Debian system.

And if testing + t-p-u fits the need of our users more, then is that
such a bad thing? If it's stable and up to date then it can be
snapshotted and released as "stable" much more easily that the current
partial freezing process IMO.


] http://www.earth.li/~noodles/ [] May you live in interesting times.  [
]  PGP/GPG Key @ the.earth.li   []                                     [
] via keyserver, web or email.  []                                     [
] RSA: 4DC4E7FD / DSA: 5B430367 []                                     [

Attachment: pgp9iy4o15c2y.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: