Re: Uploads to experimental instead of unstable
Am Donnerstag, den 11.12.2008, 13:09 +0000 schrieb Neil Williams:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:43:03 +0100
> "Sandro Tosi" <morph@debian.org> wrote:
> It would make things easier to release Lenny if all (or very
> nearly all) activities in unstable that were unrelated to the release
> *were* actually stopped.
Then the release process is buggy. If we need to freeze both testing and
unstable, what's the virtue of testing in the first place?
> Lenny is my priority and it saddens me that
> other maintainers and DD's don't seem to feel the same way.
No, the current release process means: don't do anything for > 6 months
and then rush to just catch up with upstream. It means keeping bugs
around that are fixed upstream. It means users asking on upstream's list
about bugs we ship in unstable that upstream fixed months ago.
> experimental - why is that such a bad thing?
"Warning: This package is from the experimental distribution. That means
it is likely unstable or buggy, and it may even cause data loss."
> Why do people react so badly to a recommendation to upload to experimental? It's just a name,
> a label.
No, it isn't. At a minimum, I will need to build and upload that package
again into unstable later. Experimental packages are autobuilt on a
best-effort basis, which may or may not cover all architectures. And
experimental has far less users, due to its (well) experimental nature.
> It doesn't have to mean that the package is experimental, it
> simply means that it isn't suitable for what is currently happening in
> unstable (which, in case anyone is still in doubt, is the final
> preparations for the Lenny release).
That's the part where opinions differ. Testing was created for what
currently unstable is used for. We should freeze testing and freeze
unstable instead.
> Everyone has to take account of
> transitions and blocks in unstable between releases, the release freeze
> itself is just another issue to consider with regard to unstable.
> Unstable isn't 100% available every single day between freezes, there
> are constant issues that mean that uploads need to be delayed or put
> into experimental. That's why we have experimental.
http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/resources
"The experimental distribution is a special distribution. It is not a
full distribution in the same sense as stable, testing and unstable are.
Instead, it is meant to be a temporary staging area for highly
experimental software where there's a good chance that the software
could break your system, or software that's just too unstable even for
the unstable distribution (but there is a reason to package it
nevertheless). Users who download and install packages from experimental
are expected to have been duly warned. In short, all bets are off for
the experimental distribution."
Sorry, but your description doesn't match at all with both devref and
the warning about experimental packages.
Regards
Thomas
Reply to: