Samuel Thibault wrote: > Uoti Urpala, le Mon 01 Apr 2013 05:12:46 +0300, a écrit : > > Distributions that make latest > > software available are necessary for free software development. > > Again, that's one of the things experimental is for.
It is not. You can't reasonably install things from experimental rather than unstable by default, nor is there a flag for "this really should be in unstable if not for badly managed release" which would allow autoinstalling those packages. Consider the GDB example I mentioned earlier; GDB 4.5 should be installed by default for users of unstable, rather than expecting them to notice that their system has become too outdated, investigate it and find out which package to manually update. It is unreasonable to tell the users and upstreams that Debian is going to keep users on a known inferior version by default for a long time, just in case more testing is needed to discover problems in the release version (often in addition to multiple already discovered problems that Debian is intentionally leaving for users to suffer from, as the most natural way to fix them would be to update to a newer upstream version). Also, many things don't get separately packaged in experimental, like GDB 4.5 isn't (I don't know whether this particular case is due to release or maintainer otherwise not keeping it up to date, but there are lots of extra issues due to release, and most of them are unlikely to be because of maintainer being too busy with other release work). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1364816331.1928.103.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid