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

Re: A concrete proposal for rolling implementation

On Thu, 05 May 2011 17:46:34 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:

> > Yeah, experimental is not really the good place. We really want in
> > rolling only packages where we have the assurance that they will land
> > in unstable the day after the release (so automatically and not with
> > a manual source upload).

Ack, especially in the "automatic" part.
> Isn't the ability to "copy" .changes file around suites a completely
> orthogonal problem?  I'd love to have the ability, on demand, to
> "upload" a package which is currently in experimental to unstable, no
> matter rolling.  

Putting my pkg-perl hat on: Manually "moving" packages doesn't scale
for almost 2000 packages in total and ~5 new upstream releases per

I'd really love a clean possibility to (1) upload new upstream
release during the freeze (2) without "polluting" unstable as the
staging area for RC bugs fixes in testing and (3) auto-migration
after the thaw.

If this means redefining experimental (and using PPAs for the
current experimental uploads) or creating a new unstable-next suite
as proposed by Raphaël doesn't look crucial to me.

gregor, who enjoys this constructive discussion
 .''`.   Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - PGP/GPG key ID: 0x8649AA06
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-    NP: Funny Van Dannen: Sexualitaet

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: