On Wed, 14 May 2003 23:57:48 +0300, Chris Leishman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> We'd be better off going back to just turning unstable into frozen
> when we're near a release and getting rid of testing entirely. That
> way people won't be running a distribution you claim they shouldn't
> be, until we're at the stage when it's appropriate.
But that took forecver. The idea is to have testing, not as a
useful target for people to run, but as a repository of packages that
may be close enough to what frozen achieved after months and months
of freezing. Well behaved packages would only be about 10 days old in
testing, as opposed to months old in the frozen distribution.
Testing is a release tool. Not a distribution for random end
users to run.
manoj
--
Your love life will be... interesting.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
