On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 05:57, Ondrej Certik <ond...@certik.cz> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> wrote: >> Ondrej Certik <ond...@certik.cz> (05/02/2009): >>> Ok. But we are wasting people's time. I just got another email from a >>> Ubuntu user that he will rather consider compiling it for Ubuntu's PPA >>> himself, because he cannot use debian experimental. Of course. >>> >>> So he needs to invest his time in the package, I need to invest my >>> time in the package and the result is that it will not even be in >>> unstable anyway. :( >> >> (Following at home, so I might be missing something obvious.) >> >> What's the difference between unstable and experimental from that Ubuntu >> user point of view? If the use of a PPA is what I think it is, he has to >> fetch the source, be it from unstable or from experimental, throw it >> into the *builder of his choice, and upload that to the so-called PPA. >> >> How much time does he need to dget && *builder && dput? That's not what >> I call "invest time in the package". > > Ok, you are probably right. So I'll prepare an upload to experimental > and other people can just dget and pbuilder it.
Is it easier then add an experimental source to /etc/apt/sources.list and apt-get -t experimental install python-numpy? What is the problem of using experimental? moreover, even because this is an experimental package itself, where by-hand operation are done downloading the tarball, and you request tests before uploading. Experimental is there to be used, and if users have a bad feeling using it, the same is to be there when using unstable too (like the names say). So, my suggestions is: upload to experimental and let your peers (blog posts, ml msgs, morse code ;) ) know where to find it and how to install it. >> And not breaking unstable at this point of the release cycle is >> something that matters, especially for late hotfixes that might be >> needed (and there still are such needs). > > Yes. I am unhappy that unstable gets frozen for such a long time, but > I understand that with the current setup (e.g. unstable, testing, ..), > there is probably no other way. As smarter people than me already explained, unstalbe is not frozen, but if you upload there "lower level" packages not targetted to Lenny, the "higher level" pkgs, that depend on those lowers, will start depends on them (via shlibdeps and so) and neither the highers will be able to transit to testing from unstable but needs t-p-u (that results in a loooot less users testing the package for errors). Cheers, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
