On 28/04/2011 12:03, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Simon McVittie wrote: >> On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 at 11:29:28 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >>> - at freeze time, instead of freezing rolling, we make a snapshot of >>> rolling (I call it testing) and this is where we do the work left >>> to make it ready for release >> >> So your "testing" is essentially the pre-2000 "frozen" distribution [1], and >> your "rolling" is basically the current "testing" without the need to freeze? > > Yes. > >> If that's the case, calling the distributions unstable/testing/frozen/stable >> might make everyone less confused :-) >
+1 > Might be, except that I don't want to keep the name "testing" due > to its connotation that doesn't reflect well the goal of something > that's constantly usable. > Except that it's lying to our users to name it "rolling" because packages from rolling won't be rc-bug free. For this reason, I think that "testing" is a very well choosen name, more honest about its state. If people think that "testing" (as a suite) is broken, then we should try to change that idea, instead of just changing its name. (IMO) Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- 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/4db94b3e.8080...@dogguy.org
