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

Re: Woody retrospective and Sarge introspective

On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 11:33:51AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Anyway, I think that you shouldn't worry too much about debian-cd.

I'll believe it when I see regularly updated images for a few months in
a row...

> > My opinion on what we should do about this hasn't changed much: I still
> > think the best way of getting consistent, controllable is to maintain
> > a candidate distribution in a releasable state permanently.
> I completely agree with you. But I don't think that this candidate
> distribution should be "testing". It should be a separate distribution
> in which explicit uploads are made.
> But we need a similar scheme maybe with only one "candidate" release
> without any "testing script" running on it.

Which adds an extra distribution that has to be:

	* carried on the mirrors (+50%)
	* tracked in the BTS (+75-100%)
	* maintained by each developer (+100%)
	* administered by ftpmaster, etc (+30%)
	* understood by our userbase (+30%)
	* tested (+90%)

etc. The numbers in brackets are an estimate of how much extra work will
have to be done compared to what's currently done. I don't think what
you're suggesting is feasible.

> This is really useful for many purposes... let's take the Gnome2
> transition. [...]

That's quite possibly true -- certainly the archive as it stands doesn't
handle "large" updates as well as it might. But that's a relatively minor
problem, IMO. It's certainly too minor to warrant coming anywhere near
doubling the amount of work it takes to maintain Debian on an ongoing


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''

Attachment: pgpa5i0WgI7rk.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: