Re: problems with the concept of unstable -> testing
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 06:07:25PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> "clear that most people don't work on RC bugs instead of working on their
> packages": I don't have any data on that, it's mostly based on
> perception. Let's try to gather data on something relevant:
> Number of distinct posters per month on email@example.com:
> So, the number of people working on RC bugs has significantly decreased
> since the beginning of the freeze.
Accountable by ther being less RC bugs (obviously) and perhaps vote_002
and vote_003 taking up peoples time.
> "it's judged socially incorrect to work on one's packages in unstable or
> *experimental* during the freeze."
> I'm not sure if a difference is made between unstable and experimental
> by people complaining about people doing something else than fixing RC
> bugs. Is the concern purely technical, ie "working on unstable packages
> makes thing harder for the release"? Or social, ie "you should work on
> the release instead of doing $FOO."
Work on very disruptive changes in unstable is discouraged as this may
mean that packages which mean to go through to lenny aren't able to. The
release team actively encourages the use of experimental to avoid these
I would also note that working on unstable != working on release. The
RC bugs still need fixing.
* toresbe wonders what would happen if Ted Walther and Amaya were put in the
<Amaya> toresbe: blood, sweat, tears and finally castration