On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 04:49:42PM +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 01:31:24PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:41:35AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > It is clear from the discussion that there would be consequences. Some > > > would be negative, some positive. I think that we have now a pretty good > > > understanding of the possibilities and their consequences. The remaining > > > problem is to count DDs heads in the two camps: > > > - "Let's focus on stable releases. A rolling release should not be > > > provided officially by Debian." > > > - "Let's see what we can do about rolling, provided we find a way to do it > > > without diminishing the quality of our stable releases." > > > > FWIW I'm in neither. My camp would be: Please do not impede our way to > > produce stable releases in any ways, do whatever you want with rolling. > > I'm sorry but I find that a lame request. If, in whatever circumstances, > Debian as a project decides to care about something beyond stable > releases, for instance something called rolling, it will as a matter of > fact use power of the project for such new thing and thus distract that > power from stable releases. Always. Saying that anyone can do anything > as long as it never interferes with what we have now is exactly the > definition of keeping the status-quo, i.e. preventing improvement. > Granted, it also prevents breakage.
Huh, no, you can do lots of stuff that don't harm releasing a Stable… > > I've suggested integrating aptosid (or $derivative) people inside of > > Debian as a way to provide rolling, I know that Joss did so on planet > > too e.g. That has two very important advantages: > > * it brings in new blood *now* (and not an hypothetical later) to > > actually take care of rolling (which doesn't make all my reservation > > moot but I reckon does lessen their scope significantly); > > * it brings people who know how to do that and already have > > infrastructure to do so. We would just give them the opportunity to > > benefit from the larger and robust infrastructure we have, while > > taking their experience. Looks like it's win-win. > > Have you asked *any* contributor of *any* project about why they didn't > put their efforts in Debian but instead into a different project? That's not the same thing as creating ways inside of Debian to scatter resources on too many projects. That would be irrational. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madco...@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.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/20110504155811.gg27...@madism.org
