Re: CUT and stable releases Was: Re: R 3.0.0 ...
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 12:19 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
Correction: Of course CUT should be testing during no freeze. If testing
remains unstable(t-dt) during a freeze it is still CUT. Otherwise CUT
can be defined as unstable(t) or "new_release"_RCx.
> I think it is "new" in the sense it adds a new dimension to the problem.
> I'm repeating the proposal again here, a little differently compared to
> before:
>
> t is current time.
> dt is the delay for packages to go from unstable to testing.
> T0 is the time for a freeze leading to next release.
> dT is the time from freeze to next stable release.
> T1 is the time the last stable release was made.
> RC0, RC1, ... are release candidates for next stable.
>
> - experimental:
> as before: experimental(t)
>
> - unstable:
> never frozen = unstable(t): Here we have the CUT :) And packaging of new
> upstream releases are not hindered by the freeze period.
>
> - testing:
> Case 1) No release: testing(t) = unstable(t-dt)
> Case 2) Release: testing(T0) = new archive called e.g.
> "next_release"_RC0, then RC1, ... until the last RC bug has been
> squeezed out leading to next stable.
>
> - stable:
> Case 1: No release: stable(t) = "previous_release"(T1) (of course with
> security updates, etc.)
> Case 2: Release: stable(t) = testing(T0+dT) (see above).
>
> Of course a lot of details have to be squeezed out but the above covers
> the main idea. What do you think?
>
Reply to: