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

Re: "testing" improvements

On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 09:03:19PM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote:

> Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> writes:
> > You said to let testing get out of sync.  And that would either mean
> > abandoning testing as almost-ready-to-release (then what is its purpose?),
> > or releasing with packages out of sync.
> But if noone test testing (because too far from unstable), do people have to
> wait for stable to realize testing has problems?
> Where does the name "testing" come from then?
> Isn't testing "testing" helpful for making a better stable?

The way I see it, it doesn't matter one bit whether anyone even _looks_ at
testing until we start to prepare for a release.  Until that time, all of
the "testing" happens in unstable, and "testing" is misnamed.

 - mdz

Reply to: