Re: Bug#484009: Bug#484129: release.debian.org: packages in tasks should be fixed in priority and removed in last resort after discussion
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 2008-06-04 18:36, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> No it's not. A user that prefers to have broken software rather than
> no software (if the option "non broken" software is absent) should use
> unstable. I mean it.
> You can easily use testing by default, and unstable if the program
> isn't in testing, using an /etc/apt/preferences that contains:
Thanks for your helping suggestions. For me personally, I don't think it
is a good alternative, since I prefer to stay with lenny after it
becomes stable. Unstable packages leave the slightly bitter taste that a
downgrade won't be supported, once the package reenters testing.
Therefore, IMHO, I prefer to have a package not removed from testing, if
the chances are that it might reenter in the not too distant future, ie.
before the release of lenny as stable.
I agree that it is a difficult decision for the release team to decide
on the fate of a package (not to talk about the fact that there are
thousands of them). Just in my very humble opinion as a user who
doesn't contribute directly as a DD, the decision to remove a package
from testing should not be taken too lightly.
> But I repeat: testing is what will become the next stable. We don't
> take buggy software in stable, and for <put your definition of non
> essential software here> packages we *do* prefer no packages than a non
> working one.
My point was solely on the *temporal* removal of packages, that have a
state not as bad as unusable and that have chances of being RC free for
As another example take ntp. I don't know the reasons, why it was
removed. If it was removed, because the release team think that the RC
bug can't be resolved in time for release, it's fine with me.
Looking at #448408 it is stated by one of the uploaders, that they just
like to wait for the next stable upstream release. I cannot judge how
likely this is to happen in time for lenny. If the chances are not low,
however, I think it might have been better to leave ntp in testing --
especially since it appears to me that #448408 is just as relevant for
etch and so it doesn't put people upgrading from etch in a worse position.
I stress again that this is just my personal humble opinion as a non-DD
user of debian and please don't take it as an offence!
I very much appreciate the generally *excellent* work of the DDs and the
release team! Thanks a lot for producing such a wonderful distribution!
Thanks to all!!! (I can't stress THIS too much!)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----