Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
Couldn't .debs that aren't 100% at least go into potato? That's what
unstable is for isn't it ?
Regards
Sarel Botha
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Havoc Pennington wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 MallarJ@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Ya know, I don't want to offend any of the developers or anything, but I'm
> > curious about something... Why is it that Debian is always the last to get
> > packages for any given product? When KDE came out, rpms were right around the
> > corner. This seems to be an ongoing trend... Is it just because the Debian
> > group is so quality concious?
> >
>
> It is. There are always rpms sooner, but those rpms are invariably broken
> in minor ways, and since there are no "official" rpms and you don't know
> what the system they were built on was like, there's no guarantee they
> will work at all. Often dependencies are wrong and the like, and RPM's
> dependency tracking isn't as good to begin with.
>
> The Debian packages are maintained officially and strictly quality
> controlled by Debian policy and the "lintian" script. Also all the
> Gtk/Gnome/Imlib etc. packages are being prepared together in a staging
> area to be sure they work together properly.
>
> It's worth the wait, in short.
>
> Havoc
>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null
>
>
>
Reply to: