[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: auto-builders



On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 03:19:40PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > Note that both of these require a change to the autobuilders.  If the
> > > unstable builder is wired to ignore anything targetted for "stable"
> > > or "frozen" and the stable builder is wired to export its changes to
> > > unstable, then the "stable unstable" target is equivalent to "stable"
> > > [we can update policy, for neatness, of course].
> 
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 12:17:34PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > how do I specify a stable only release?  I have foo 1.2.x in stable and foo
> > 1.3.x in unstable.  Uploads to stable only affect stable and uploads to
> > unstable only affect unstable in this case.
> 
> Propagation to unstable only happens if the version in stable is higher
> than the version in unstable.
> 
> But you're right -- there is an issue if the package shouldn't even exist
> in unstable (because it's been split up or renamed or some such).  So we
> probably shouldn't propagate to unstable if the target is only stable.

I don't think we should propogate to unstable automatically at all. It
is the wrong thing to do, and will cause more problems if everything
isn't synced for all archs.

Ben

-- 
 -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  bcollins@debian.org  --  bcollins@openldap.org  --  bcollins@linux.com  '
 `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'



Reply to: