Re: testing-dedicated ML? ( was Re: End of hypocrisy ? )
On 21/07/2014, berenger.morel@neutralite.org
<berenger.morel@neutralite.org> wrote:
>
>
> Le 21.07.2014 15:31, Slavko a écrit :
>> Ahoj,
>>
>> it seems, that there can good idea to provide separate ML for testing
>> users.
>
> I agree, since testing is not for normal users (well... theoretically
> at least), so we could imagine that different MLs for (beta-)testing and
> productive usage (questions about "how to do..." and stable related bugs
> would go there, I guess).
> Now, I have no idea about the complexity of maintaining a new ML. Maybe
> there are also problems because some issues can not clearly affect only
> one of both testing and stable?
>
>
I would like to see a list for each of:
experimental
unstable
testing
stable (by version number, eg, at present, 7)
oldstable (by version number, eg, at present, 6)
obsolete (versions previous to oldstable)
hybrid - combinations of the above, eg, where people mix stable and testing, etc
I believe that it would be helpful, and, would provide for most
scenario's, and, when a new release occurs (eg, for Debian 8), the
archives get each moved into the lower level archive, so the oldstable
archive goes into the obsolete, the stable archive goes into the
oldstable, and the testing archive goes into the stabl;e achive.
Or, the top three;
experimental
unstable
testing
then by version number;
7
6
5
4
3.1
3
That might make for more lists, but it could be workable, and, more useful.
--
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..............
"So once you do know what the question actually is,
you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
A Trilogy In Four Parts",
written by Douglas Adams,
published by Pan Books, 1992
....................................................
Reply to: