Hi, Am Sonntag, den 16.01.2011, 11:22 +0200 schrieb Kari Pahula: > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 12:51:21PM +0530, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > how about this: We upload ghc-7, once ready, to experimental, along with > > an updated haskell-devscripts package and two or three libraries to > > verify that everything is working across most architectures. Then we > > upload to upstable and let the rest of the libraries follow there. > > With or without having the ghc6 pseudopackage in it? Before or after > the release? There's still the chance that ghc6 in testing would need > an update and that would be a whole different operation if we had > already started the transition to ghc 7 land. already with, I don’t think ghc 7 is too unstable or too new to impose on users of experimental or unstable. At first, of course, things go to experimental until it is clear that ghc and some libraries builds on buildd. Maybe by that time, squeeze is out already... if not, I’d still like to upload to unstable. Squeeze is very close and none of the blocking RC bugs are on Haskell or related packages. So the chance that ghc6 in squeeze needs an update is low, and will still be low after the release, the only difference would be whether we have to do this operation via testing-proposed-updates or stable-proposed-updates. But if this is deemed to risky we can just keep experimenting with ghc 7 in experimental until the release is out. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part