Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org
Selon Martin Schulze <joey@infodrom.org>:
> I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where probably
> more people will be able participate as well.
I hope so.
[...]
> > Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and
> > Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing.
>
> It may pose a problem that development in unstable usually continues
> while testing is frozen and only important bugs should be fixed.
>
> However, if unstable would be frozen at the same time, would
> development stop? Probably not. I'm pretty sure that several would
> start with separate repositories and the like to make more recent
> versions of the software available which they maintain.
I think it would be marginal. After all, the experimental distribution
does exit for this purpose and nonetheless, people do not neglect
unstable.
> We must not forget the focus on fixing the frozen distribution and
> making it ready, though.
>
> > Freezing unstable forces people to work on fixing bugs, and the
> > quicker the bugs are fixed, the quicker the distribution is
> > released and the quicker Debian people can start working on
> > on the next release.
>
> Freezeing unstable forces people not to do development in unstable.
> It won't force people to fix bugs and the like. Closing a motorway
> won't stop people from driving (too) fast, it would stop people from
> using the motorway for driving (too) fast instead.
Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were
working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons,
and freezes were shorter.
Of course, without "testing", synchronizing arches was a pain,
that's why I'd say let's combine both.
Instead of always telling than a given idea won't work, let's
try it and conclude afterwards.
Cheers,
--
Jérôme Marant
Reply to: