Re: Why no Opera?
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 11:12:33PM -0400, icelinux@icelinux.net wrote:
> Quoting "Roberto C. Sánchez" <roberto@connexer.com>:
>
>> The same
>> exact thing could be said of Apache, MySQL, PostgreSQL, and any of a
>> number of other packages which received tremendous testing upstream.
>> None of them have empty pages on bugs.d.o.
>
> Are these packages which have been packaged upstream for Debian as well? I
> am sure there is never an empty page of bugs for most software.
Exactly. Which is why we want the package to sit in testing for a while
before we release it.
You see, many of the bugs in our bug tracking system are
Debian-specific. Those won't be reported to the Opera upstream people.
> * So, you are attempting to find all of the bugs before a release instead
> of having to patch afterward?
Yes. We don't succeed in that, but that's a different matter.
> * Does this actually reduce the number of bugs, or does it just take
> longer?
Can't parse this.
> I have found several already since I began working on my Deb-Ice project.
> I believe a lot are being missed in the underused packages.
[citation needed]
It's painfully clear that you don't understand how Debian works. We
don't upload packages one by one to the "stable" release; that would not
be manageable. Instead, we test the distribution more or less as a
whole, and once it's ready, release it as a whole. After that, only
*updates* to *serious bugs* can go into stable -- no fixes to minor
bugs, no new features, and *certainly* no new packages.
If Opera isn't in etch now, it will never be. It might end up in lenny
if someone cares enough and we have the right to do so, but that's the
best you'll get.
--
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
Reply to: