On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Donovan Baarda wrote: > > This probably has been (and currently) discussed elsewhere. I think the > > problems are that there are too many packages and too many dependencies. > > Yep, the old exponential dependancy problem...
I see the "problems with unstable" page is over 500 pages (448KB) long. > > Maybe a solution would be to have a fourth collection (beside stable, > > testing and unstable): "mini". It would not have thousands of packages. > > For example, it would only have about 150 to 300 packages. Only new > > packages are added if a vote approves. > > This sounds a little bit like what I think is needed; Debian needs to be > partitioned into sub-distro's with their own independant release schedules. > > > What do you think of having a mini distribution that limits the number of > > packages allowed? > > Why not just call it "debian-core". Then you can have "debian-gnome", > "debian-kde", "debian-xfree" etc. Each of these can be implemented as > seperate distro's with their own releases, using Packages files pointing > into the pool. > > This paritions the dependancies, making it all easier to manage, speeding > the release cycle and potentialy allowing people to mix-n-match stable-core > with unstable-gnome if they wish. So do you mean that these sub-distros don't have any dependencies on any packages within the other sub-distros? Jeremy C. Reed echo '9,J8HD,fDGG8B@?:536FC5=8@I;C5?@H5B0D@5GBIELD54DL>@8L?:5GDEJ8LDG1' |\ sed ss,s50EBsg | tr 0-M 'p.wBt SgiIlxmLhan:o,erDsduv/cyP' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
