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

Re: distinguish between "core" and "main"?



On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 10:12:42 +0200
Harald Dunkel <harri@afaics.de> wrote:

> Installing testing for the whole system is no option. The base
> system (the core packages) should be provided by the most recent
> release. I don't want to get an unbootable system.

You are more likely to get a problematic system by MIXING versions than
you are by sticking just to stable or just to testing. Unbootable is
fairly unlikely (boot loader bugs aside).

The fewer people are running that precise mix of versions, the harder
it is for anyone to give assurances about how that system may perform.

> In the new system the main/testing packages should be _guaranteed_

NOTHING in Debian is guaranteed. Not even in a stable release is
it guaranteed that all packages will work together. Fairly likely, yes.
Our best effort to achieve as good as we can make it - definitely.
Guarantee? Impossible. Dreamland. Tell you what, you do all the testing
and maybe Debian might refund the cost of the software - oh wait....

It all comes down to how many people test any one particular
combination of packages. Many eyes make all bugs shallow; many testers
make for higher probability of packages working together nicely. If
there are fewer eyes on one variant than on another then the more
popular variant will, in all probability, be less buggy - that's just
simple maths. Nothing is guaranteed. There is no warranty.

If you sincerely want the Debian system which has had the most testing
of all possible variants and which Debian can honestly describe as "the
most likely candidate for a system where packages work together as
nicely as it is practical to achieve" you MUST use stable and then keep
that up to date with the stable point releases and security updates.

Building stuff then takes place in chroots, e.g. using pbuilder, based
on whatever suite or mix you require.

Many, many software development companies use this approach for their
own GNU/Linux software development, whether proprietary or not.

> to work together with the most recent core/stable packages. Of course
> they should also work together with core/testing, as they do now.

Who is going to find the many thousands of testers who currently file
bugs against unstable and testing to make a stable release? Any split
would have to have at least as much testing for all possible
permutations, so you have just volunteered to coordinate testing
amongst a set of users as large and as varied as all of the current
Debian userbase for each possible permutation. Well done.

I look forward to seeing all popcon scores treble in the coming
weeks....
 
> Making this scheme work would imply more frequent releases for the core
> packages, but I am sure this can be done. I would expect that we would
> get <1000 core packages.

No, it would require huge numbers of testers to use each possible
permutation as their daily use systems across all of the fields in
which Debian is currently used. If not, then the alternative can never
be as good as the current stable release and the whole exercise is
pointless.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: pgpv1_0EdUocw.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: