Re: Development standards for unstable
On Thu, January 12, 2006 16:02, Frank Küster wrote:
> But if a rather new package in active development has many non-RC bugs,
> some of them crippling upstream features, and one of them "New version
> N.m.o available" (retitled three times meanwhile), then our users are
> probably better served by telling them "We can't provide a properly
> integrated package, please install it into /usr/local".
There's of course a lot of room for nuance; a "NPOASR" package deserves a
lot less patience than a package already in stable. But in general, if we
shipped something, people are probably using it, and if there's no
pressing reason to remove it (e.g.: it doesn't work), quite some bugs but
none serious, we could be better of just shipping it. In the worst case it
hasn't been improved since the last release, but will at least work just
as well.
Thijs
Reply to: