On 02.04.2013 16:35, Svante Signell wrote:
The best solution would be having unstable _never_ frozen, at the
cost
of another repository during the freeze period. This was proposed
some
time ago, see
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00273.html
repeated here for convenience:
That's a contentious definition of "best". You also appear to have
somewhat missed the point of my response to that original message, i.e.
<URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00274.html>
i) experimental being really for new stuff
ii) unstable unfrozen always:
- stable+1: if no freeze -> testing after xx days as before
- stable+1=unstable frozen at freeze time: if during freeze ->
testing
-> stable
- stable+2: if in freeze -> unstable
And the frozen unstable/testing repository could cover a subset of
the
packages in unstable: The "good ones". That would effectively reduce
the
freeze period.
I'm still struggling to see how this is fundamentally different from
the "frozen" suite which "testing" was introduced to replace, more than
a dozen years ago. As per my earlier message referenced above, see
<URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/08/msg00906.html> for
some detail of why "frozen" didn't work.
As proposed in the thread the idea should be written down at
http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseProposals
Since this idea is new as far as I could see it's time do do that.
FSVO "new".
Regards,
Adam
--
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/613c903831a5003cf7f8d2254668f...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
