-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 06/05/11 13:17, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote: > On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 08:29 +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: >> >> Understood. If you reduce the number of packages to be released by >> focusing on a core package set with 1000 or 1500 packages instead >> of +30000, then your can do more rapid releases because there are >> fewer packages to wait for matching the release criteria. > > By rapid releases, are you referring to core/stable or main/testing? How > rapid? Do you mean people would now do system upgrades in less than 2-3 > years (life of a Debian release)? >
Only core/stable should be released. The "rest" comes from main/testing. I cannot speak for others, but I don't wait 3 years. I do regular updates/upgrades to include the most recent security and bug fixes. We've scheduled regular maintenance weekends every 3 months for this. Important updates are installed immediately. >> Of course this doesn't make the +29000 packages outside of the >> proposed core repository go away. But I think we already agreed to >> use testing for installations of "non-core" packages. > > But it makes them second-class. They are surely not second-class, they are just not within core/stable. Debian already classifies packages in different priorities, to be used today when package updates are pushed into testing, for example. I just cannot use these priorities in sources.list, _and_ I cannot rely upon the packages in today's testing to work with the core packages in stable > Also, backports is supposed to fix this > anyway. All needed there is volunteers willing to do the work. Why would > you want a different scheme? > Because backports is not supported as good as the current testing repo. Why have a 3rd repository next to stable and testing with a similar package set, instead of keeping an eye upon compatibility right from the start? I understand that splitting main into core/stable and main/testing would be a deep cut. Surely I do not expect it to happen within the next few weeks or months. Just think about it. Regards Harri -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk3rqIYACgkQUTlbRTxpHjcGBQCeLcGloib4F3WXlHz/GeHCazyd ja4An2lzCyVvGrQUyVLjWvXipyZyY0cO =Bz2S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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/4deba886.5000...@afaics.de
