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

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 02.04.2013 16:35, Svante Signell wrote:
The best solution would be having unstable _never_ frozen, at the cost of another repository during the freeze period. This was proposed some time ago, see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00273.html
repeated here for convenience:

That's a contentious definition of "best". You also appear to have somewhat missed the point of my response to that original message, i.e. <URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00274.html>

i) experimental being really for new stuff
ii) unstable unfrozen always:
- stable+1: if no freeze -> testing after xx days as before
- stable+1=unstable frozen at freeze time: if during freeze -> testing
-> stable
- stable+2: if in freeze -> unstable

And the frozen unstable/testing repository could cover a subset of the packages in unstable: The "good ones". That would effectively reduce the
freeze period.

I'm still struggling to see how this is fundamentally different from the "frozen" suite which "testing" was introduced to replace, more than a dozen years ago. As per my earlier message referenced above, see <URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/08/msg00906.html> for some detail of why "frozen" didn't work.

As proposed in the thread the idea should be written down at
Since this idea is new as far as I could see it's time do do that.

FSVO "new".



Reply to: