Re: Woody retrospective and Sarge introspective
At (time_t)1028123529 Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> 1) keeping a package out of testing can be done by filing RC bugs, but
> this causes problems for other packages who will not be able to move
> to testing because they depend on it.
> Ex: libA 2 is in unstabl
> libA is voluntarily kept out of testing with a RC bug
> progB is in unstable and depends on libA 2 because it is compiled
> against it
> progB will never enter testing before libA enters testing even
> if it can compile and work with libA version 1 that is in testing
> => this can be worked around with testing-proposed-updates if we add an
> automatic promotion from t-p-u to testing
I'm not familiar with testing-proposed-updates, but there is at
least one other mechanism that would seem to help not only this,
but other problems: Testing chroots.
If developers built their packages in a testing environment
instead of an unstable one, there would be fewer packages stuck
involuntarily in unstable. Also, building in a chroot would help
highlight other dependency problems.
How difficult would it be to have a minimal testing chroot
automatically generated every n days?
John R. Daily