[0] http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseProposals
Nice page, will study it in more detail in due time. I did not see my
proposal there, is it possible to add new information to that page?
It's a wiki. Just create an account an log in.
Martin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@l
On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 13:44 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 06:55:04PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > Of course there was a reason for introducing testing. And I did not
> > propose it to go away either. It should stay for packages marked as
> > being part of unstable at fre
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 06:55:04PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Of course there was a reason for introducing testing. And I did not
> propose it to go away either. It should stay for packages marked as
> being part of unstable at freeze time. Probably a separate repo for
> frozen unstable is need
On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 17:14 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 12.01.2013 16:11, Svante Signell wrote:
> > Or to say it differently:
> > experimental being really for new stuff
> > unstable unfrozen always:
> > - stable+1 if no freeze
> > - stable+2 if in freeze
> > - and stable+1=unstable at the f
On 12.01.2013 16:11, Svante Signell wrote:
Or to say it differently:
experimental being really for new stuff
unstable unfrozen always:
- stable+1 if no freeze
- stable+2 if in freeze
- and stable+1=unstable at the freeze time.
This is similar to what used to happen before the testing suite exis
On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 15:50 +0100, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> Le samedi 12 janvier 2013 15:21:24, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> >
> > I recommend instead of redefining logic of unstable, branch off new
> > suites with new logic.
> >
> > ...and then back to that issue of "maintainers should concen
On 01/12/2013 08:59 PM, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 16:05 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> Doesn't this diminish significantly the advantages of CUT? Back in the
>> days of the CUT discussion, one of the main "issues" associated to
>> testing is that it stops rolling during fre
Le samedi 12 janvier 2013 15:21:24, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
>
> I recommend instead of redefining logic of unstable, branch off new
> suites with new logic.
>
> ...and then back to that issue of "maintainers should concentrate on the
> release" again: I do sincerely worry that additional suite
Quoting Svante Signell (2013-01-12 13:59:02)
> On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 16:05 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > [ dropping -www, setting Mail-Followup-To: cut-team ]
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:06:00PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote
On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 16:05 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> [ dropping -www, setting Mail-Followup-To: cut-team ]
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:06:00PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > > On 01/05/2013 01:28 AM, alberto fuentes wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 7:05 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> I probably should have already sent a message a while ago on this, but
>> yes the monthly snapshots have been put on hiatus during the freeze.
>> The official d-i betas and release candidates are recommended now so
>> that they get suffici
[ dropping -www, setting Mail-Followup-To: cut-team ]
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 04:06:00PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > On 01/05/2013 01:28 AM, alberto fuentes wrote:
> >> The few people on the list seems happy with it. If this is working
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/05/2013 01:28 AM, alberto fuentes wrote:
>> The few people on the list seems happy with it. If this is working
>> well, it needs a little more love on debian.org and a 'testing-cut'
>> link in the repos pointing to latest cut, so it ca
On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 02:44:42 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/06/2013 02:02 AM, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> >> I agree. It would be nice if it was at least possible to upload security
> >> updates
> >> right now to old-stable, even if that wasn't officially supported. At
> >> leas
On 01/06/2013 02:02 AM, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
>> I agree. It would be nice if it was at least possible to upload security
>> updates
>> right now to old-stable, even if that wasn't officially supported. At
>> least, this
>> would be a nice way to go forward (eg: based on "best effort",
Hi pabs,
On Sa 05 Jan 2013 02:50:47 CET Paul Wise wrote:
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Mike Gabriel wrote:
Slightly different approach: However, for serious server deployments we in
Debian might want to think about supporting older releases a little longer
than atm.
A scheme like
veryol
Hi Thomas,
On Sa 05 Jan 2013 07:03:25 CET Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 01/05/2013 09:50 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
Please check out these links if you want to make this happen. Probably
an initial target of supporting oldstable for the same length of time
as stable (instead of just a year) is a good fi
Hi Neil,
On Sa 05 Jan 2013 09:58:48 CET Neil Williams wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:03:25 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 01/05/2013 09:50 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>
> Please check out these links if you want to make this happen. Probably
> an initial target of supporting oldstable for the same l
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:03:25 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/05/2013 09:50 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> >
> > Please check out these links if you want to make this happen. Probably
> > an initial target of supporting oldstable for the same length of time
> > as stable (instead of just a year) is a
On 01/05/2013 09:50 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>
> Please check out these links if you want to make this happen. Probably
> an initial target of supporting oldstable for the same length of time
> as stable (instead of just a year) is a good first goal to achieve
> before adding more supported suites.
I a
On 01/05/2013 01:28 AM, alberto fuentes wrote:
> The few people on the list seems happy with it. If this is working
> well, it needs a little more love on debian.org and a 'testing-cut'
> link in the repos pointing to latest cut, so it can be set on
> sources.list and forgotten
Yes, we need to adv
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Slightly different approach: However, for serious server deployments we in
> Debian might want to think about supporting older releases a little longer
> than atm.
>
> A scheme like
>
> veryoldstable -> oldstable -> stable -> testing -> unsta
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:09:42PM +0100, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi Alberto, hi all,
Hi Mike
>
> On Do 03 Jan 2013 19:18:27 CET alberto fuentes wrote:
>
> >Ubuntu has done some poor decisions but it has done some other that are
> >okay. We should consider merging some of them back.
> >Im thinkin
What is the defference:
1. Insert a new stage between "stable" and "testing"
and
2. double the period of automatic migration from "unstable" to "testing"?
m? :-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lis
Hi Alberto, hi all,
On Do 03 Jan 2013 19:18:27 CET alberto fuentes wrote:
Ubuntu has done some poor decisions but it has done some other that are
okay. We should consider merging some of them back.
Im thinking about the 6 months release thing. Without further ado, here's
the proposal pre-draft:
Im adding the cut-team to the loop. Original message:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00082.html
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
wrote:
> AFAIK there is already an ongoing effort to provide an usable updated
> rolling release of Debian.
>
> http://joeyh.
On 01/04/2013 09:15 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Le vendredi 4 janvier 2013 05:44:57, The Wanderer a écrit :
That doesn't seem to match my experience.
I most commonly encounter apt-listbugs bug lists via 'apt-get
dist-upgrade'. If I say "no" in response to the list of bugs, and then run
'apt
Le vendredi 4 janvier 2013 05:44:57, The Wanderer a écrit :
>
> That doesn't seem to match my experience.
>
> I most commonly encounter apt-listbugs bug lists via 'apt-get
> dist-upgrade'. If I say "no" in response to the list of bugs, and then run
> 'apt-get dist-upgrade' again, I see the same l
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:18 PM, alberto fuentes wrote:
> _Proposal_:
> Add a new release stage between stable and testing. Called usable or
> whatever name we find fit for it
>
> stable <- <- testing <- sid
>
> Migrate packages after a period* in testing without RC bugs.
> *a 2-4 weeks seems reas
On 01/03/2013 06:32 PM, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 05:12:03 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
No, because apt-listbugs exists and provides a nice interface so users
don't have to care about pinning details for themselves.
Can apt-listbugs do anything more than abort the entir
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 01/03/2013 08:15 PM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> http://cut.debian.net/
>
>
> Isn't this (more or less) what you are asking for?
Isn't this (more or less) dead?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: U
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 05:12:03 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > > * Pin packages with RC bugs on upgrade. This is:
> > > - Non trivial: it makes you understand how bad the bug is and know how
> > > the pinning system works
> > No, because apt-listbugs exists and provides a nice interface so
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:45:45PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > * Pin packages with RC bugs on upgrade. This is:
> > - Non trivial: it makes you understand how bad the bug is and know how
> > the pinning system works
>
> No and yes.
>
> No, because apt-listbugs exists and provides a nic
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:18:27 +0100, alberto fuentes wrote:
> The only ways to prevent this if you are running the more or less
> up-to-date testing are:
> * Pin packages with RC bugs on upgrade. This is:
> - Non trivial: it makes you understand how bad the bug is and know how
> the pinning sy
On 03/01/13 19:18, alberto fuentes wrote:
> Request for comments!
AFAIK there is already an ongoing effort to provide an usable updated
rolling release of Debian.
http://joeyh.name/code/debian/cut/
http://cut.debian.net/
Isn't this (more or less) what you are asking for?
signature.asc
Descr
Ubuntu has done some poor decisions but it has done some other that are
okay. We should consider merging some of them back.
Im thinking about the 6 months release thing. Without further ado, here's
the proposal pre-draft:
_Proposal_:
Add a new release stage between stable and testing. Called usabl
36 matches
Mail list logo
