Re: shortening release cycles
On 11 Jul 1999, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> * reorganize the debian archive
> problem: no plausible/maintainable schemes yet proposed
I helped formalize something after the last release with another developer
who's name now escapes me. Richard seemed to like it but I don't push for
it too hard because I felt like giving Richard a chance. The proposal
went something like:
1) add a new section, maybe called devel, which can never progress to
unstable or stable as a whole, and doesn't have a code name.
2) allow packages to go from devel to unstable after a period with no bugs
above a certain level against it and all depends are in unstable.
3) freeze unstable at will, the number of bugs should be relitively small.
this requires a bit of work by the boot floppies and cd groups, but both
seem to be up to the task recently.
With the addition of apt to our tool belts, I think another suggestion
would be to require staging areas whenever there is an upgrade that breaks
other packages and these packages are maintained by more than one
maintainer. When a staging area is ready, they ship their packages to
Finally, it should be possible for a maintainer to request that their
package does not go to unstable even if there are no bugs.
This is all off the top of my head, there are probably other details,
-------- Brandon Mitchell ---- email@example.com --------------
------------ http://bmitch.dhis.org/ ---- ICQ: 30631197 --------