Re: Re Xemacs needs help
On 01 Mar 2004 12:37:28 +0200, debian <era> said:
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 02:37:34 -0600, Manoj Srivastava
> <email@example.com> posted to debian-emacsen:
>> This severity is *designed* to allow packages to live in unstable
>> that should not yet go into testing.
> But the practice of uploading to unstable something which cannot
> reasonably be expected not to have RC bugs is questionable, agree?
No, I don't. You upload into experimental only there are
stable versions of the package already in Sid; new, untested code
belongs in unstable -- no one is likely to be surprised by the
If the package is known to be broken, do not upload it at all,
provide a separate aptable location for the known bad packages.
It is perfectly reasonable to have foo and foo-cvs packages in
unstable, with the foo-cvs packages marked with a serious bug so they
do not propagate into testing.
This is the only sane way to do things with the current and
historical practice of not auto-building experimental.
Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equpped with 18,000 vaccuum tubes
and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000
vaccuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1 1/2 tons. Popular Mechanics, March
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C