On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:52:12PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Bill Allombert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070616 15:43]: > > I understand the wish of a short freeze, but QA need to happen on the > > packages we ship, not with the package that happened to be in the > > archive at the time QA occured. That is why we are Debian after all. > > Nobody wants to promote to not doing QA with the final packages. All > that we want to do is to do the same kind of QA also to earlier versions > of the packages to avoid noticing the issues to late.
I understand: I tried to do that for Etch, but it simply did not work out. In particular my effort toward removing spurious conffile handling was a total failure due to a later dpkg change. > > Let say I propose as a release goal that no packages will prompt for > > config files changes during upgrade unless the users manually changed > > the config files themselves. Would you accept it ? We do have the > > capability to report all such issues. Do we have the capability to fix > > them ? > > How many issues do we have? How would the check be that we don't > reintroduce such issues later? (I'm not considering the capability > the important question now, that's one of the advantages of release > goals.) Today maybe 0. In one year ? I don't know. Hopes are that Etch dpkg will reduce the number of issue compared to Etch. Cheers, Bill. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
