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

Re: why allow broken packages to get all the way to mirrors?

On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 02:26:34PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Sun, April 3, 2005 05:39, John Hasler said:
> >> For instance, let's say we are a food company. Why not check to see if
> >> the food is rotten before it gets to the consumer?
> >
> > That's what Unstable is for.
> Why, if tests can be automated, do we have a need to go through the
> process of spreading a package to mirrors, have people install it and file
> bug reports by hand? (Often these reports are a day later already
> out-of-date because it was just a matter of time.) Isn't one of our
> strenghts that we can automate what we can so we can use our time for all
> those tasks that are left?

Good idea! Let's make a new repository of packages that only
receives new packages that have their dependencies fulfilled.

We need a good name for such a repository. How about "testing"?

Petri Latvala
The house of sarcasm

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: