* Brian Nelson <pyro@debian.org> [2004:03:18:22:58:47-0800] scribed: <snip /> > My opinion is that testing should not be publicly available until it is > in the "release candidate" or "beta" stage, or whatever you want to call > it. Up until that point, it should be a virtual distribution only > existing in the output of the testing scripts. I think it does a > disservice to the community to have a publicly available distribution > that appears to be a compromise in between stable and unstable, but in > actuality can be much more broken than unstable. How could that work? Can apt/dselect be coerced into understanding this distinction? As it is, if testing is in my sources.list, won't I get whatever is in testing, so long as I ask for testing packages? Or, is there some way to ask for "mature" testing packages, as opposed to else? What do you think? -- Best Regards, mds mds resource 877.596.8237 - Dare to fix things before they break . . . - Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . . --
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature