Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
This might be nitpicking (sorry if it is), but I could not find the answer in google. I think it is a bad idea to allow packages to migrate to testing automatically. Sometimes a maintainer might want the packages to stay in unstable than in testing. A particular package might call for more attention from Sid users to expose its bugs... My personal opinion is that a package should migrate only upon the consent of the maintainer.
This is why experimental exists. If the maintainer has serious doubts about a package's stability, it first goes into experimental. A package does not leave experimental without active intervention from the maintainer.
Adv:- 1) Testing will probably have less RC bugs than there are currently have -> improved stability in testing -> less work for the bug squashing party -> less release cycle. 2) Maintainers make better choices and they know when the package is ready for "testing". 3) Gives the users of sid sufficient time to find a bug and report it. Dis adv:- 1) Updates to testing might be slower.
As it currently stands, there is a 10 day "cooling off" period. If a package is in Sid for 10 days without serious or grave bugs, it will propogate. I don't think that lengthening this will improve much of anything as the larger number of people using Sarge means that some bugs that slip though the cooling off period will be discovered later. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature