Re: status of jackd? (bug #318098)
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 03:56:21PM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
> errr... where would YOU like to work? In intentionally broken
> unstable becuase "it's just unstable"? You surprise me.
We need to work somewhere. We don't intentionally break unstable for no
> >*for*. It lets us break things while they're in development in order to
> >push the distro as a whole forward. No one says that you have to be running
> isn't that what experimental is for?
Yes, but that's also what unstable is for.
You just don't get it. If we do all the work that breaks things in
experimental, unstable won't have all the newest stuff in it. Because the
newest stuff will still be broken. Then you'll have to use experimental, at
which point we're right back to the same place. Stuff doesn't magically
just work the minute we upload it to some archive, we have to do the actual
work to fix things.
> >the s00p3r 133t newest version of everything on your system at all times.
> no but I want to. Because non-1337 stuff is usally several years old
> (not at the moment but it's getting old fast) and not suitable for
> desktop usage (in general)
A lot of people have this complaint and it's one I sympathise with. The
problem is that no one has done the legwork to fix it, short of forking the
project. I would love to see someone take this on within the framework of
Debian. Maybe you should do it.
> >Testing should be a good compromise for your needs anyway.
> well, the fixes take forever to get to testing plus not sure about
> security (apparently there's some effort to fix this as was mentioned in
> another message in this thread: http://secure-testing.alioth.debian.org/)
> so while testing seems like a good idea in general it doesn't seem to
> be very appealing in its current incarnation... (I started to use
> testing but gave up)
Yet another part of the project that needs hard work to fix. Want to help?
- David Nusinow