Re: [Caml-list] Release 3.09.1
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 10:05:48PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 01:04:40PM -0500, Eric Cooper wrote:
> > Perhaps we should auto-build everything into experimental first, so
> > developers would have a consistent, new environment to build against.
> > Anything that fails to rebuild could cause a high-priority bug email
> > to the maintainer. Then after Zack's suggested one week period, the
> > successfully built packages (or manually uploaded ones) could go to
>
> You know though that what you propose is what happens for unstable, and that
> after 10 days, non-buggyness and consistent build on all RC arches, the
> packages moves to testing.
>
> This sounds suspiciously like what you propose, don't you think so ?
Yes, but it's my impression that lots of users track unstable, which
should still have "individual packages of release quality", to
paraphrase a recent debian-devel post. I was concerned that the
autobuilt packages might not meet that standard.
--
Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u
Reply to: