On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:48:25 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Selon Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where >> probably more people will be able participate as well. > I hope so. > [...] >> > Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and >> > Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing. >> >> It may pose a problem that development in unstable usually >> continues while testing is frozen and only important bugs should be >> fixed. >> >> However, if unstable would be frozen at the same time, would >> development stop? Probably not. I'm pretty sure that several >> would start with separate repositories and the like to make more >> recent versions of the software available which they maintain. > I think it would be marginal. After all, the experimental > distribution does exit for this purpose and nonetheless, people do > not neglect unstable. I do not think you understand what the experimental distribution is, and how it is different from unstable, if you can say that. (not a full distribution, contains truly volatile packages, not supported by buildd's, for a start). >> We must not forget the focus on fixing the frozen distribution and >> making it ready, though. >> >> > Freezing unstable forces people to work on fixing bugs, and the >> > quicker the bugs are fixed, the quicker the distribution is >> > released and the quicker Debian people can start working on on >> > the next release. >> >> Freezeing unstable forces people not to do development in unstable. >> It won't force people to fix bugs and the like. Closing a motorway >> won't stop people from driving (too) fast, it would stop people >> from using the motorway for driving (too) fast instead. > Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were > working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons, Not true. People were mostly twiddling their thumbs. Only a small subset of people can actually help in fixing RC bugs. > and freezes were shorter. Of course, without "testing", > synchronizing arches was a pain, that's why I'd say let's combine > both. > Instead of always telling than a given idea won't work, let's try it > and conclude afterwards. We have tried the whole freezing route. But feel free to try it out (like aj did Testing), and tell us how it would have worked. manoj -- Ha. I say let them try -- even vi+perl couldn't match the power of an editor which is, after all, its own OS. ;-) -- Johnie Ingram on debian-devel Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C