Re: Some observations regardig the progress towards Debian 3.1
>Packages in unstable have dependencies in unstable which may not be
>met in testing, hence they cannot simply be included in testing.
>Unfortunately we need to take care of this.
I've come up at least once with a suggestion on how we could avoid this
problem and increase the throughput of unstable->testing. However I got
virtually no feedback on this.
The original description is at
Today, I'd rather describe it as adding a "pre-testing" stage, where
packages migration from unstable would not take generated binary deps
into account, and candidates for migration out of unstable would be
rebuilt against pre-testing for migration.
That would allow many packages to migrate much more quickly out of
unstable, while still filtering out a good number of early-detected RC
bugs. Then the current method for migration into testing can be
applied to pre-testing instead of unstable, and since there should be
less RC bugs there, as well as less blocker packages (like a recent
gcc, glibc, kde, gnome, python, <insert-favorite-here>), packages
could eventually migrate more quickly into testing.
There _are_ many things to think about, but it may be worth to
investigate it, and see how we could handle the potential problems we
can think of.
>Packages with similar depencency complexity pose the same problems, I'm
>sure. A lot of dependencies need to be fulfilled before they can be
>included. If somewhere in the chain there is a problem, the package
>cannot go in.
That's typically the type of problem I'm trying to address with this
[please CC me on followup]
Yann Dirson <email@example.com> | Why make M$-Bill richer & richer ?
Debian-related: <firstname.lastname@example.org> | Support Debian GNU/Linux:
Pro: <email@example.com> | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratuity
http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>