Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:11:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[...]
> If unstable is not a distribution, what the hell is the point
> of having all the paraphernalia of unstable around? The whole point
> of uploading to unstable is to have people test packages in
> unstable.
If people test unstable, then it's unstable we should release, not
testing. As somebody said in this thread not enough people are trying
testing, and that's one of our problems in the release cycle.
[...backwards a bit...]
> In other words, stop all development dead, since experimental
> is never ever used as a default ditribution by anyone sane.
Stop all development ? See the situation for gnome 2.8. It is in
experimental. It is compiled for several architectures, and is maybe
soon ready to be put in unstable. Do you really call that stopping all
development ?
> This is incorrect, t-p-u is indeed supported by buildds --
> though this paragraph seems to be more like a rant than anything
> else.
Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/09/msg00005.html
"We are also still missing official autobuilders for
testing-proposed-updates on alpha and mips. All other architectures
appear to be keeping up with t-p-u uploads."
And vorlon told me not so long ago that it was still the case, and that
it was the reason why the NMU by Frank Lichtenheld for kxmleditor[1]
through t-p-u still hasn't made it to sarge... and you may know that all
KDE applications updates have to go through t-p-u, since unstable is
"polluted" with KDE 3.3 which won't make it for sarge.
Take it as a rant if you want, but I'm just noticing.
Mike
1. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=265680&msg=35
Reply to: