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

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 08:00:45PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > Both of these are plausible; the difference is whether you autobuild
> > from unstable or testing.  I would prefer the former, which means your
> > former case.
> 
> Autobuilding from testing won't work well AFAICS, as it introduces
> another delay until rc-<arch> bugs are found. Building packages with
> generic RC bugs and ignore them for subtesting seems to be the lesser
> evil.

I disagree here, since building from testing means not duplicating all the job
done in tier-1 testing. My project called for a per-arch override, uploading
directly to arch-unstable, in case of stals and such.

Also, building from testing makes synchronizing with tier-1 testing for an
arch stable release easier.

Friendly,

Sven Luther