On Friday 03 November 2006 23:51, Sven Luther wrote: > Bah, i can commit to debian-cd, and now that i know about this fact, if > ever a .udeb i asked is out there, i will naturally add it to the > blacklist.
No, sorry that was not the intention. Having everybody committing uncoordinated changes to debian-cd is also not the answer. Why do you think there is someone like a release manager for d-i? It is because interactions are complex and changes often need coordinating and correct timing. I'm perfectly happy to make the changes. I just need to know that there are things that need changes. And the way I know that is by people discussing and announcing things on the list. > Also, there may be another future for .udebs out there than just for > d-i use, altough i know the d-i folk doesn't like this :) For now, and until it is decided differently by the d-i team and ftp-masters, the debian-installer section is for exclusive use by debian-installer and the d-i team has complete control and veto power over what goes in there. I've seen the smiley, but I don't think that is appropriate. Please don't joke about such matters, just accept the facts and act in accordance with them. If there is a serious other use for udebs, we need to discuss that and discuss how to implement it in the archive first. I've seen some suggestions, but so far no serious plans. Basic message: we do _not_ want rogue udebs out there. My earlier request stands: do not request new udebs without discussing them on the list first; not for d-i and not for any other usage. I think we've discussed this three or four times now. Why is it so difficult to simply accept such facts?
pgpfWVCa14FL2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
