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

Re: Name suggestion

George Bonser wrote:
> 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.

Would we be forbidden from uploading working packages to Broken? ;)


(Thanks - that was a funny post... you _are_ kidding, right?)

Attachment: pgppkKB41gq54.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: