Differences between revisions 6 and 8 (spanning 2 versions)
Revision 6 as of 2005-01-07 17:07:05
Size: 1219
Editor: anonymous
Comment:
Revision 8 as of 2009-03-16 03:31:35
Size: 1285
Editor: anonymous
Comment: converted to 1.6 markup
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 25: Line 25:
That means tracking the stable upstream releases in unstable unless there is good reason. CVS pulls and development trees belong in experemental. -- MikeFedyk That means tracking the stable upstream releases in unstable unless there is good reason. CVS pulls and development trees belong in experemental. --MikeFedyk

See ReleaseProposals for alternatives.

Let's freeze Unstable until we are ready to release a Stable version.

Pros:

  • Keeps Unstable from being continually destabilized further
  • Would force people taking an interest in releasing Stable
  • Stable would be more up to date when released

Cons:

  • In the past this has resulted in stable releases with key subsystems like GNOME being a year or more out of date at the time of release.
  • This worked better when Debian was small.

--

On the other hand, maybe this would encourage more appropriate use of experimental ...

I have concerns about the state of unstable, and how long it would take to get it into a releaseable state compared to testing. Look at the release-critical bug lists to see the dramatic difference at the moment (December 2004). -- ColinWatson

--

I think there should be a constraint on unstable that every package should be reasonably releasable and be able to reasonably expect that the package will be ready for migration to testing within a certain period of time.

That means tracking the stable upstream releases in unstable unless there is good reason. CVS pulls and development trees belong in experemental. --MikeFedyk

See ReleaseProposals for alternatives.