On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 01:27:21PM -0500, Daniel Reed wrote: >[To the list] Should it become policy for all proposed packages to be >uploaded under "test" once they have received the required votes, and then >just moved to "curr" once they have had all problems resolved and received a >"good to go"? > >Pro: >Packages that have a more selective user base (and hence a limited number of >people to perform a functionality review) could be "in the system" sooner. >Additionally, it may open up the review process to more package maintainers >who do not actively follow cygwin-apps, but might notice new Test packages. > >Con: >If a pending package has packaging problems, premature propogation could >cause chaos on a wider scale. Currently "Test" seems to imply the >functionality is all that is at question, not the packaging itself. I cringe >to propose an even more drastic change, but perhaps a fourth category could >be created specifically for pending packages.
I don't think you can make a general rule about this. Both the Pros and the Cons are pretty compelling so I think that we should consider allowing this in some cases but only on a case by case basis. I wouldn't mind doing this in this specific case, though. cgf