Chris Gianelloni wrote: >> The stabilization idea sounds good and it could free maintainers from >> filing similar bugs over and over ; but wouldn't this be more and harder >> work for arch teams?. For example, they should carefully track the >> history of all the packages to know when and if they should stabilize it >> yet. > > Huh? > > It's simple. The maintainer says "stabilize foo-1.2-r1" which gives a > minimum level that all arches should be using. If foo-1.2-r2 comes out, > it is up to the arch team to decide if/when to stabilize it, *unless* > the maintainer requests a newer version/revision. Basically, the > maintainer sets the minimum level they would like stable. > Yeah, but is there no way for whatever the maintainer stabilises on their arch to be what everyone else should stabilise, without "filing similar bugs over and over"? (ie automation of this bit.)
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
