On 02/05/11 at 10:12 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > Hi > > Picking one piece that really leaves me "WTF?" out of this > way-too-long-thread. Happens to be a post by Lucas, but could be anyone > else too. > > > 'rolling' is a statement by the project that we consider 'testing' > > (renamed to 'rolling') > > Why the heck do we start by renaming testing? This will seriously > disrupt service for anyone for DAYS. There are just too many places > tools are using "testing" hardcoded. Too many users having that in > sources.list. Too many things assuming there is "stable, testing, > unstable". And all of them would suddenly, out of nothing, have broken > systems and need to fix them. > > If somehow rules for testing get changed (to be whatever rolling wants > to be), fine. Thats one thing. > > But for what reason change the name? That's worse PR than usually > done by politicians, and they generally do the things noone with a brain > ever does. So why?
How much of that would apply if we renamed testing to rolling (because it reinforces the PR message), but kept a symlink from testing to rolling? - Lucas -- 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/20110502092322.ga16...@xanadu.blop.info
