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

Re: status of jackd? (bug #318098)

On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:45:16PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:28:58AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 01:01:16AM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
> > >   mini rant: what's the point in breaking important packages in 
> > > unstable for significant periods (e.g. the bug above was filed 
> > > 2005/07/13)? Isn't experimental more appropriate for stuff like this? 
> > 
> > Where would you like us to do our work? This is exactly what unstable is
> > *for*. It lets us break things while they're in development in order to
> > push the distro as a whole forward.

> No, that's what experimental is for.  If you upload something to
> unstable, it should be ready to migrate to testing in a short
> period.  And it would be best that you could "prove" that it's
> ready to go to testing before you upload it to unstable.

> I really think that anything with has a alot of reverse
> dependencies (let's say 10 or something), should be uploaded to
> experimental before doing any kind of transition

I disagree.

> and should contact the release team that they plan to do so.

I can agree with that, though.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: