Hi,
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> hm... did you mean
> http://lwn.net/Articles/406301/
> "A constantly usable testing distribution for Debian"?
Yes.
> if indeed, taken on the reasoning that "testing" is a bad name and "rolling"
> is
> better, then it goes similar to what I saw behind 'constatly present'
> testing up to replacing rolling -> testing ->[removal of packages] -> frozen
Well, summarizing the whole with a few arrows is difficult but note that
the current rolling proposal is more like this:
Outside of freeze:
------------------
unstable → testing → rolling
↑
targetted uploads
During freeze:
--------------
t-p-u → testing
↗ (not automatic)
unstable → rolling
↑
targetted uploads
> now about 'pending': following description confused me quite a bit:
>
> ... during a freeze, testing is no longer automatically updated, which
> makes it inappropriate to feed the rolling distribution. That's why rolling
> would be reconfigured to grab updates from unstable (but using the same rules
> as testing).
>
> But unstable remains to serve as the entry point to feed frozen testing as
> well, so with absent other entry-point (pending in my scenario) there is a
> conflict -- I can't upload 1 version which I intend to get to frozen testing
> and another one to get into rolling (experimental obviously can't serve as
> such). or it all would go through an addendum (*-proposed-updates)?
That entry point aleady exists and is called testing-proposed-updates
indeed.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer ◈ [Flattr=20693]
Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)
--
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/20100923092730.gb28...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
