Re: Woody retrospective and Sarge introspective

["John R. Daily" <john@geekhavoc.com>]

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
<email><mailbox>john</mailbox><domain>geekhavoc.com</domain></email>