On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 02:42:05PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 01:31:31PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Since I already sent too many mails in the 'rolling' discussion, I > > decided to send one more. Here is an attempt at a summary of what was > > said so far. It might not be complete, it's probably a bit biased, but I > > hope that it's still better than nothing. When replying, please try to > > focus on specific points, and change the subject accordingly. > > That's a decent summary of what was said I think. > > Though I feel that to make the discussion more solid, the following is > missing: > > - What are the problems you try to address with rolling? And no "the > users want it" isn't an answer, I'd reply "why do they want it" if > that's the answer I get. Not that I don't understand your asking for reasons but... doesn't look having a large user base look somehow appealing to you? I think many DDs care for such since working on Debian brings more fun if someone's actually using it. Anyways... > I'd add a few questions: > - we acknowledged that some derivatives (e.g. aptosid) are doing the > work of stabilizing unstable. Isn't it a better way of doing things > in the sense that it doesn't harm testing a bit? IOW wouldn't it be > a better idea to somehow (with their consent) swallow a derivative > that seems to do what you want to instead of suffering NIH and > reinvent something a derivative does? How does such swallowing look like? Add a suite 'aptosid' or 'ubuntu'? > - I'll stress again that testing is a release tool, and sometimes to > unblock large transitions it's easier to remove a package from the > distribution so that it doesn't block thousands of other, or because > the breakage it introduces is too large. This practice is very > important, and I remember the release team having strong > altercations with other DDs at the time whereas testing wasn't > targeted at users. What would it be if testing becomes more user > targetted? Should the removal policies be amended ? Beware, I think > it's a huge no-go for the release team. I think, those in favor of advertising testing or rolling or whatever you call it have explained repeatedly that stable is still the primary target for Debian. If at some point that may change, things can be rethought but until then I don't think any such policy needs changing. Hauke -- .''`. Jan Hauke Rahm <jhr@debian.org> www.jhr-online.de : :' : Debian Developer www.debian.org `. `'` Member of the Linux Foundation www.linux.com `- Fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe www.fsfe.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature