On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Ben Collins wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 12:11:43AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > > If there is need of a technical reason here, we need a technical > > reason to forbid legitimate uploads, which is (one of the things) your > > proposal would do. > > What is a legitimate reason for uploading to stable/unstable other than > convience? I see none. However, there are inherent problems with > allowing stable/unstable uploads, which I have outlined.
No, they are not *inherent*. There is just a small statistical correlation between uploads to "stable unstable" and the problems you describe, but the mere fact of uploading to "stable unstable" is not the *real* cause of those problems. This is like saying "car produce accidents, let's forbid cars" or "Is there a reason to use cars other than convenience?". Are you aware the forcing people to make some uploads twice opens the door for another different source of possible mistakes? It seems that the only mistakes you take in account are those that you want to take in account. Your proposal is exactly like throwing the bash with the baby (sorry, don't remember the exact wording). > Because of that, and because there are no technical reasons otherwise, > I feel that they should be disallowed, to prevent the problems. I'm afraid about what will you disallow next.
