Re: CUT rolling release debian
On 03/06/2015 04:56 PM, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:
2015-03-06 15:09 GMT+01:00 Jape Person <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
On 03/06/2015 06:12 AM, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:
I was exited when I heard couple of years ago about rolling release debian
But there are not news on this topic anywhere ... is this idea still
This isn't a direct answer to your question about CUT, but might be of
I've been using Debian testing as a kind of rolling release since Lenny on
my four most important systems
That's what I am happily doing already couple of years ;)
Oops! I completely misinterpreted your situation and your question. I
might have understood better had I noticed that I was replying to
someone on debian-devel and not on the user list.
Point of view of debian maintainer ;)
I am DM and I am caring about +/- 100 small packages ... during a freeze
time I shouldn't upload new upstream releases to unstable.
And as DM I can't upload to experimental.
So there is waiting quite a lot of work for me when new debian is released.
Situation is even worse if your new version of package depends on new
upstream version of package maintained by somebody else ...
Everybody doing the same ... holding new releases.
From time to time (in freeze time) I am getting emails from upstreams if I
am still maintaining their package ... because they released month ago and
I still didn't update.
Sometimes in freeze time I am getting emails from Ubuntu users which wants
to have new upstream version in upcoming Ubuntu release.
And I sometimes hear opinion from upstreams (but not only them) that debian
shipping old releases and is slow on updating and thus not best for users
which needs fresh upstream releases.
So that's why I think CUT - rolling release debian would be great
improvement for "certain users" probably desktop users and maintainers too.
Very interesting. Thank you for explaining this to me. I have to agree
that a concept like CUT is appealing. I'd jump on a rolling release like
this immediately if it were available.
Thank you again for the explanation. I'll follow the discussion with