Re: Woody retrospective and Sarge introspective
email@example.com (Raphael Hertzog) writes:
> But he can also make direct uploads to "candidate".
Anything you can directly upload to is "unstable", by definition.
The only real distinction I can see between "testing" and your "candidate"
distribution is a layer of manual control over when big changes are allowed
to move into "candidate"... and we already have that ability, if a bit
clumsily, by filing a release critical bug against a package that's in
unstable before it gets promoted to testing.
A "cleaner" way to implement that kind of promotion hold might be exactly
the right solution to making this better? I don't think that adding a
fourth distribution feels like a good balance between effort and reward.