[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Name suggestion

I have noticed that Debian rolls unstable to frozen and then to stable in
its release cycle. In order to more accurately reflect reality, I suggest
that a fourth stage be created between unstable and frozen. I would call
this "broken".  A release candidate would roll from unstable to broken and
in this way, when someone tries to upgrade to it and it breaks their
system, it will not be any great surprise ... "I just upgraded to broken
and now my system is broken...oh, nevermind." Once broken is no longer
broken and will actually work, it should then go to frozen ... where it
should actually be frozen. If it becomes broken again after being frozen
it should be moved back to broken. It would really be nice if frozen
really ment frozen too.

In other words, once a candidate moves out of unstable, once it is no
longer called unstable ... people do not expect it be unstable. At least
if it is moved from unstable to broken, there will be no surprises. Either
than or call it unstable-frozen rather than frozen. Broken is more
accurate and shorter though.

George Bonser

The Linux "We're never going out of business" sale at an FTP site near you!

Reply to: