Eduard Bloch wrote: > #include <hallo.h> > * Joey Hess [Sat, Oct 23 2004, 08:36:18PM]: > > > > not look appear as critical for maintainer, or not important enough to touch > > > package in the holy "frozzen" state). Such bugs are a disaster, they make > > > our definition of a Stable release absurd. Yes, Debian Stable has become a > > > buggy stable release. Just face it. > > > > AIUI, you propose to freeze unstable and go back to the old method of > > having updates during the freeze be manually put in at the discretion of > > the Release Managers. If we did that, how would one of these "ugly bugs" > > be any more likely to be fixed in frozen unstable than it is in today's > > a) The release time would be shorter Proposing a change that will tend to making it harder to have most packages up-to-date, and then justifying it by saying you hope your scheme will result in a shorter release time does not seem very wise to me. > b) It would be up to humans (and not some obscure scripts) to decide > whether the bugs deseves a fix or not No, I'm talking about changes made to frozen packages. Currently these are added to testing based on human discretion, not via scripts, just as they would be under your proposal. > > currently frozen in testing, the situation is exactly what it is now; > > the maintainer and RM have to decide whether putting this fix into > > testing (or frozen) and possibly introducing new, more important bugs is > > warrented by the ugliness of the bug. If the package is one of the large > > majority of packages that are _not_ currently frozen in testing, then it > > "not currently"? Currently only base packages are frozen in testing. If you don't know this, well.. > In my solution, the whole Sid archive would be frozen. > And there will be no Testing, see subject. It seems to me that you have misunderstood my question. Or I do not understand your reply. The reason I refer to testing in my question in because I am comparing how things work _now_ with how you propose things work. Having a hard time making any sense of what you're saying now; if I cannot understand your proposal, I will have to object to it. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature