Am Freitag, dem 07.11.2025 um 14:48 +0100 schrieb Christian Hesse: > Hello everybody,
Hey 👋️
>
> At Arch Summit 2025 we had a chat about that situation and discussed
> several
> ideas. In the end we came up with one reasonable solution:
> We should introduce new repositories [core-unstable] and [extra-
> unstable] for
> this kind of testing. People would still have to enable these
> repositories,
> but I guess chances are higher than for my personal repository.
Is this also supposed to replace {gnome,kde}-unstable? I have a hard
time imagine how testing this should be done if multiple packages are
in alpha/beta that might even depend on each other in some way.
To be clear - Most of the time I consider gnome-unstable completely
broken. Just a dumping ground for new pre-releases and for users who
deal themself with this mess until it becomes more reliable. 😂️ I'd
like to keep it this way.
Would -unstable depend on core- and extra-testing or on the "stable"
repos?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
