On 01/05/11 at 23:46 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > Benefits for Debian: > > - attract users who think that testing is only a development branch, and > > want newer software than what one finds in stable. Those users are > > likely to be rather advanced users (developers, free software > > contributors), thus interesting to work with. Some of them could > > become Debian contributors. And even if they don't, more users of > > testing/rolling means more testers of the next stable release > > [remember how the bug reporting rate of Ubuntu is higher than > > Debian's -- some areas of Debian could use more testers]. > > > I think those can use unstable,
But unstable is a development branch not targeted at being used by 'standard' users. > and if they use rolling, I think I > already "proved" or at least explained why those don't contribute to the > stable in being, but rather the N+1 one. I think that you are mixing two things here: 1) whether we want to turn testing into a rolling release 2) what do do with the 'rolling' suite during freeze (fork a 'frozen' branch at the beginning of the freeze ? freeze rolling ? start by freezing rolling, then after a few months, fork 'frozen' and unfreeze 'rolling'?) > Which is probably not bad, but not the most urgent thing. > > > - give back to the free software world by providing a platform where new > > upstream releases would quickly be available to users. Since users > > would be able to test new upstream releases earlier, they would be > > able to provide feedback to upstream devs earlier, contributing to a > > shorter feedback loop. > > Why doesn't unstable fit that? Because unstable is a development branch not targeted at being used by 'standard' users. - Lucas -- 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/20110501221042.ga5...@xanadu.blop.info