Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
On 03/05/11 at 13:31 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 03/05/2011 11:41, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > It is clear from the discussion that there would be consequences. Some
> > would be negative, some positive. I think that we have now a pretty good
> > understanding of the possibilities and their consequences. The remaining
> > problem is to count DDs heads in the two camps:
> > - "Let's focus on stable releases. A rolling release should not be
> > provided officially by Debian."
> > - "Let's see what we can do about rolling, provided we find a way to do it
> > without diminishing the quality of our stable releases."
> I hope my message will be clear here. But, I find your message quite
> subjective. Without reading your message or knowing your opinion on the
> subject, we can very easily guess that you prefer the second option.
> I don't think that putting people in "camps" would resolve anything here.
> The first option is not about making it not officially provided by Debian,
> but there are people that are not convinced yet by the idea and some of
> them think that sacrificing stable for the sake of a hype is not a good
> idea especially with no evidence that it'll work. There are other
> arguments against and your two options really can't summarize all opinions
> and looks to me an easy way to diminish what has been said during all this
> And, no, I don't agree when you say "I think that we have now a pretty
> good understanding of the possibilities and their consequences". All this
> thread is about this issue particularly. We don't know yet the
> consequences that rolling would have on our stable releases. But, we can't
> simply adopt it without having any guarantee on its success. Because if it
> turns out that users still prefer $other, then we gained nothing but some
> burden within Debian and some bad consequences for Wheezy.
What kind of guarantees are you looking for, exactly? Can you suggest
ways to acquire them?