On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 17:16, Magnus von Koeller wrote: > On Thursday 28 February 2002 12:47, Daniel Stone wrote: > > I have working qt3/kdelibs4/kdebase3 packages, as I stated, but I > > am not releasing them to the public until they're fully tested. > > Well, what is unstable for, then?
I am under the impression that unstable is for things that the maintainer thinks will not break anything, but which have not been tested enough for more general release. When packages are known to break things they are not suitable for unstable and should be privately distributed. That is done for every major new version of X, I am doing it for SE Linux packages, and lots of other developers are doing it too. I use kmail for all my email and konsole windows for all my development. Because of all the Debian packages I am developing I am forced to run unstable and keep relatively current with it. If a Debian unstable update breaks KDE in a big way then that'll interfere with my development work (and that of many other developers too). Therefore it is prudent for Daniel to hold off on uploading these packages to unstable in my opinion. When he is certain that the core KDE apps work well and don't break other things AND that there is a good upgrade path from them to future KDE packages then it will be time for an upload to unstable. -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has >4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void.
