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

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> schrieb:

> Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>> The question is: how do you release a SCC arch, if at all?
> AFAIK, the terminology is FCC/SCC for mirror split, and "release-arch"
> and "non-release-arch" for which arches get released as stable. So the
> question is "how do you release a non-release arch?"
> Once you get over giggling at the phrasing (or maybe that's just me),
> there're a few answers. The ones that come to my mind are:
>   (a) Just build against testing/stable instead of unstable; when etch
> happens, fix up any remaining problems, and release a snapshot that
> more or less matches etch. Rinse, repeat.

Would the task of setting up an archive for the fixed up sources, and
the resulting binary packages, be on the shoulder of the porters alone,
or would there be support by the ftpmasters, and especially by the
system administrators?  Will it at least be possible to host such an
archive on a debian.org machine?

[This I think should be the case]

Will it be possible to get the fixed-up sources reintegrated in point
releases of stable?

[don't know whether this is desirable]

>   (b) Just build against unstable, until you get bored. Then stop,
> clean up some stuff and do some basic testing, then release a snapshot.

This would make security support much harder.  The first question above
still is interesting here.

Regards, Frank
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

Reply to: