Re: buildd administration
Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 03:51:06PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:
>> > Rather, it seems much more likely that we would want to push such packages
>> > *out* of unstable.
>>
>> Really? So now, unstable should be maintained in a releasable state
>> *too*?
>
> Not necessarily; but as packages in testing can only arrive there after
> moving through unstable, unstable will need to be rather sane, too.
Explain why this is? How does a package which is not yet releasable,
in unstable, cause a problem which requires pushing the package out of
unstable?
Reply to: