Re: problems with the concept of unstable -> testing
Christian Perrier dijo [Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 07:40:12AM +0100]:
> 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
> 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.
I like and subscribe to your idea. I feel that many of us are actually
bitten by that same problem - even if we have upstreams that
understand the process of releasing Debian, it is hard to expect them
to work with the madness associated with long freezes. And I do not
think we will be able to avoid long freezes in the future, just
because of the scale we work with - We might be able to somehow reduce
the length, but not as much as to meet a lively upstream's fantasy :)
Gunnar Wolf - email@example.com - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF