On 11404 March 1977, Mike Bird wrote: >> > Artificially lowering the RC count in Testing is not always >> > preferential to keeping Testing in a state amenable to testing. >> You say yourself that it's not artificially as RC bugs in "new" packages >> don't get that easily in testing anymore... > Removing long-standing packages and stigmatizing them as "new" in order > to keep the RC count down is artificial because such packages are not > new. It should only be done very late in the release process if the > packages are too late to be fixed for the next release.
> You may regard the process as some kind of perverse incentive to DDs but > the direct consequences of Testing missing long-standing packages is to > make Testing unfriendly to newbies, annoying for experienced users, hence > less valuable for testing Debian, hence less valuable for improving Debian. Feel free to work on an alternative algorithm to manage testing in a different way, fixing what you currently dont like. I am sure that, if you get the work done, the release team will take a look at it. Of course that involves actually doing the work, Im sorry for suggesting that. -- bye, Joerg 2.5 million B.C.: OOG the Open Source Caveman develops the axe and releases it under the GPL. The axe quickly gains popularity as a means of crushing moderators heads. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
