Re: Bug#484129: release.debian.org: packages in tasks should be fixed in priority and removed in last resort after discussion
> On Mon June 2 2008 11:44:46 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > See it the other way around: it shows testing the way stable could be if
> > nothing is done. I'm all for removing buggy packages early in the
> > release cycle: it makes it less likely that we release without a package
> > that many users need, because it was removed too late in the release
> > cycle, and it allow bug fixers to focus on bugs that we really,
> > absolutely need to fix to be able to release.
>
> A thing is best characterized by what it does and how it
> is used rather than by the name we associate with it. For
> a moment let's recall what Testing really is for most
> Debian users - Testing is the "Debian Desktop Edition".
I think this is a gross mis-characterization of debian's testing. I
can see why you would want to rename testing to "Debian Desktop
Edition" because it fits your argument, but unless you have evidence
than just your anecdotal evidence you cannot state that testing is
what most new users use.
> Stable works well on older hardware, particularly servers,
> but it's just not usable for most desktops and laptops.
I think it is in fact usable for most desktops and laptops.
There is a problem with not having the latest drivers for the latest
hardware in debian, but a large part of that problem has to do with
the behavior and licensing of device drivers in the marketplace,
something debian has little control over.
> The unnecessary holes in Testing are not merely a device
> to coerce DDs into fixing RC bugs. They make Debian harder
> to use, harder to test, and harder to improve. Debian
> would be better without these holes.
> There are better processes for reducing RC counts and
> improving Debian without crippling "Debian Desktop Edition".
A rather facile conclusion to a complex problem.
Jeremiah
Reply to: