On 2011-04-27, sean finney <sean...@debian.org> wrote: > * unstable always feeds to testing > * "release N" == "testing", until the "freeze". > * when "freezing" for "release N" > * "testing" is pointed at "release N+1", and no longer automatically > feeds "release N". [...] > * RM's can still choose to migrate packages from (not frozen) testing as > long as it's practical to do so. > * When deps/transitions/etc prevent testing migration, "release N > proposed updates" is used for one-off bin-NMU's and/or sourceful > backports.
So this requires people to coordinate and finish transitions in parallel to a massive load of patch review. And even better we can't even cherry-pick from unstable or testing anymore because it got broken through transitions. binNMUs are even more fun because then your version in release N proposed updates is higher than what's in new testing, which means that it should be propagated from p-u to testing which breaks because it would miss the libraries for which it got binNMUed in the first place. Which means in turn that you need to binNMU into release N p-u and binNMU again with a higher version into testing. The whole thing only seems doable if you add a *lot* more people to the relevant points in the process. (And yes, new testing would require transition hand-holding from unstable to it as usual.) Kind regards Philipp Kern -- 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/slrnirguq5.d5d.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de
