Re: Building against testing [was Re: "Recompile with libc6 from testing" <-- doesn't help i think!]
On Sun, Sep 15, 2002 at 11:17:51PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Been considering whether maybe having some sort of automated "hey, you've
> > made a dozen debconf uploads recently, none of them have had RC bugs,
> > so I'm going to divert any more uploads you make to experimental for
> > the next 11 days, so the current version can get into testing" might be
> > convenient, though.
> Murphy's law would hold, and the last upload you consider would have an RC
> bug.
That wouldn't be particularly catastrophic though. If it's found after,
say, five days, you just move the latest upload that got diverted to
experimental back to unstable, and keep going.
Alternatively, you could do something like have uploads with an urgency
of "risky" or something get diverted to experimental until the previous
version either (a) makes it to testing, or (b) spends, say, fourteen
days not getting it to testing and "times out".
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Reply to: