[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: problems with the concept of unstable -> testing

Quoting Bastian Venthur (venthur@debian.org):

> Is that important? Unstable is frozen for nearly 1/2 year now, that's a
> problem we should try to solve if we don't want to degrade ourselves to
> a server-only distribution.

While I don't see such a big issues in this, there is maybe room for
improvements for sure.

It could be by promoting experimental a different way we are doing it
right now...or by adding an intermediate stage between unstable and
experimental. For that latter case, I somewhat fear the (human) resource
problem we would end up with as it would need more people to take care
of the whole mess^W organization.

What I wanted to add also is that the "problem" pointed here does not
only affect desktop environments as most contributors pointed. For
instance, the samba packaging team is currently facing an interesting

- our upstream is now providing 3 different branches (3.0, 3.2, 3.3)
- we have upstream 3.3.* series in experimental since upstream
  published the first pre-releases. This helps both our users
  and upstream to fiddle with brand new shiny features. As this
  is the version we'll want to ship with squeeze, it helps preparing
  the work.
- we have upstream 3.2.* series in unstable/testing, as the normal
  path to have it in lenny. We will stop at 3.2.5, which is the
  version that will be shipped with lenny

However, upstream released 3.2.6 a few days ago and will release more
and more 3.2.* "bugfixes only" versions. Those however introduce too
many changes for us to safely consider this for lenny.

So, where could we upload up-to-date 3.2.* packages for the benefit of
our users who prefer having the last bug fix releases?

We can't do it in experimental as 3.3 is already using it.

When lenny is released, backports.org is the appropriate place for
this, imho. However, lenny-backports will only open when lenny is
released and should indeed have packages backported from unstable at
that moment. For us, that will be 3.3.*

So, I had another "idea": open <foo>-backports at the moment <foo> is
frozen so that maintainers can upload the latest bleeding edge
versions of their packages there, when using experimental is not
possible for some reasons.

Hopefully, that discussion (in backports-users@lists.b.o) could lead
to something....we'll see.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: