On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
> Implementation:
>
> When the current Unstable (potato) is frozen, instead of
> creating a new Unstable area, we will create the Pool and
> populate it with a copy of potato; plus, create an empty Working
> area and wait for maintainers to start populatin
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 01:39:23AM +0200, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
>
> > Implementation:
> >
> > When the current Unstable (potato) is frozen, instead of
> > creating a new Unstable area, we will create the Pool and
> > populate it with a copy of potato;
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 01:39:23AM +0200, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
> >
> > > Implementation:
> > >
> > > When the current Unstable (potato) is frozen, instead of
> > > creating a new Unstable area, we will cre
In short:
I would like to see the difference between
1) "Test this please, it'll probably work for you, I just want to know
there are no serious problems before declaring it ``working''" packages
and
2) "This is what I've done so far, you might be interested to check it,
but there is still a lot
On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 07:34:26PM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
> I'm formally proposing the release process that we have been
> discussing for over a year, known as ``package pool'', for
> discussion and voting. The discussion will take place on
> debian-project. Anyone interested should follow this
[Lame cross post to -announce removed, gah]
> The ftpmasters do their work for the project. They exist
> on behalf of the project. The project does not exist as result
> of the ftpmasters, it's vice versa.
However, the FTP masters are the resident experts in field of 'ftp archive
mainti', igno
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
> This proposal includes erradication of the "experimental" area,
> because very few maintaiers use it, because it's "out of the
> way" for people to download from it, and because it will be
> redundant with the "pool" layer.
Like Gregory said, experiment
once to mirror `unstable/foo' then a fortnight later, to mirror
`testing/foo'. A package pool is one way of solving this, but it makes it
difficult to mirror a single architecture.
H.
http://www.debian.org/~ajt/testing-19991025.tar.gz for what code I've
done, fwiw.
Cheers,
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 03:19:47AM +0200, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
[initial populating of "working"]
> If something is in stable, then it is ``working'' by current definition.
> If nothing else is declared ``working'' then the stable version should be
> there.
That's a point, touché. If the mainta
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 03:34:41AM +0200, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> In short:
>
> I would like to see the difference between
> 1) "Test this please, it'll probably work for you, I just want to know
> there are no serious problems before declaring it ``working''" packages
> and
> 2) "This is what
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 09:29:53PM +, Alexander Koch wrote:
> [f'up]
>
> On Tue, 19 October 1999 21:43:57 +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > Why not allow Source only packages ?
>
> Something like that is the only workable thing, methinks.
> Having a source where a source is 99+ % the same da
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 10:57:51PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Torsten Landschoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 09:43:57PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> >
> > > Why not allow Source only packages ?
> >
> > That will win nothing. You can't use apt-get on them,
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 09:43:57PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Philippe Troin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 1) The way the Debian archive works requires the data to be stored
> > twice (source package and .deb).
>
> Why not allow Source only packages ?
Because installing such pac
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 12:29:23PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 07:34:26PM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
> > I'm formally proposing the release process that we have been
> > discussing for over a year, known as ``package pool'', for
> > discussion and voting. The discussion wi
On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 08:32:07PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> That said, this proposal has no meaning without an actual implementation
> of 'Package Pools', and none exists yet. However I know of at least 2
> efforts to make one, so maybe it should be shelved until one gets
> finished? [It
On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 08:48:21PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> Like Gregory said, experimental serves a purpose that is not covered by
> your 4 pools - software in there literally does not work..
Yes, but pool can have multiple versions of a same package.
> > dependencies resolvable within
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 03:18:47AM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
> Also, could you people please stop for a moment and really evaluate
> the ammount of code needed? Get real: this is _trivial_.
We'd need code to:
* make life easy for the mirrors (either a working package pool,
or t
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
> Yes, but pool can have multiple versions of a same package.
But how on earth is anyone supposed to know which version is the one they
want?
> Hmm. I actually meant to use apt's install-time dependency
> check. It's smart enought to know when something
Quoth Anthony Towns on 25 Oct, 1999:
[ Disclaimer: I am not a Debian developer yet, due to the new-maintainer
freeze. I have been following the project for a while, however. Please
forgive if this is out of order. ]
> First, proposals without code are pointless. They're fun and all to
> d
Previously Martin Schulze wrote:
> Apparently I wasn't clear enough.
I had already posted by then...
> The ftpmasters do their work for the project. They exist
> on behalf of the project. The project does not exist as result
> of the ftpmasters, it's vice versa.
True. However that doesn't alwa
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > The ftpmasters do their work for the project. They exist
> > on behalf of the project. The project does not exist as result
> > of the ftpmasters, it's vice versa.
>
> True. However that doesn't always seem to work that way. A good example
> is that we have a consensu
Previously Martin Schulze wrote:
> Then why? Does a proper bug report exist? Is it just slowly processing
> bug report? Or is it something else?
There is indeed a bugreport, and it's old. Months at least. Last I heard
the only reason was that it was a lot of work...
Wichert.
--
__
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 01:30:44PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Martin Schulze wrote:
>
> > Thus if the project (or the project leader) wants things to be
> > done with the archive, the ftpmasters have to get it implemented
> > (with or without help from others) or they will have to
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 12:12:39AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
>
> > Yes, but pool can have multiple versions of a same package.
>
> But how on earth is anyone supposed to know which version is the one they
> want?
Please elaborate. What are you ta
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 04:06:27PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 03:18:47AM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote:
> > Also, could you people please stop for a moment and really evaluate
> > the ammount of code needed? Get real: this is _trivial_.
>
> We'd need code to:
>
> * ma
Anthony Towns wrote:
> stable, testing, unstable (note the sorting order! I'm so proud.)
>
> Stable and unstable would remain more or less exactly as they are now. There
> aren't any changes to dinstall, or how/where you upload to, etc.
>
> Testing is a distribution that's completely
On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 01:40:16PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> Can people who favor package pools come up with a list of things package
> pools give us that this much simpler approach doesn't?
I like this proposal. But I'd list the difference as:
this is more automated, mine is more maintainer-d
Fabien Ninoles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 09:43:57PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > Philippe Troin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > 1) The way the Debian archive works requires the data to be stored
> > > twice (source package and .deb).
> >
> > Why not
28 matches
Mail list logo
