Re: "testing" improvements
En réponse à Matt Zimmerman <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > I'm sorry but most people that want recent versions of packages
> > in a more stable state use testing, not unstable. These are facts,
> > not theory. Since, testing is a pre-stable release it has to be
> > tested even more than unstable, because what's going to be on CDs
> > is testing not unstable.
> What is your point exactly? That people use testing to get newer
> so we should force newer packages into testing despite its purpose?
Force packages into testing? You must have missed the point.
I said let packages into testing for architectures where nothing
prevent them to. Why would mipsel failures block x86 packages,
Jérôme Marant <email@example.com>