On 25/08/2010 10:13, Russ Allbery wrote: > Yves-Alexis Perez <cor...@debian.org> writes: >> Hmhm, out of curiosity, why is t-p-u “way riskier”. > > Mostly because there isn't any large pool of systems using t-p-u the way > there is for unstable,
Yeah, good point. > >> Would it be possible (at one point) to “fix” it and stop using unstable >> as t-p-u and experimental as unstable when freeze is in action? > > We could try to get lots of people who normally use unstable to instead > test testing plus t-p-u, but I'm not sure they'd be willing to do so. I > for example don't want to switch my unstable systems to testing plus t-p-u > for a variety of reasons. > I have a box running testing (well, not updated due to flaky net connection right now) which I really should pass on testing+t-p-u. But wouldn't CUT fit nicely there? Cheers, -- Yves-Alexis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c74e5c9.3020...@debian.org