On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 03:19:47AM +0200, Gergely Madarasz wrote: [initial populating of "working"] > If something is in stable, then it is ``working'' by current definition. > If nothing else is declared ``working'' then the stable version should be > there.
That's a point, touché. If the maintainer doesn't like the vesion in stable, upload/promote another one, or remove it. [experimental] > I thought the point of the proposal was to have better release > management, with better tested packages, etc... read later... Yes. That won't happen if "just about anyone" downloads from pool :-) > > You're not _supposed_ to run apt on pool unless you're > > willing to live on the edge. It would be equivalent to running > > apt on experimental. > > > > Perhaps we can implement the long-promised feature of apt to > > let the user choose one of many installable versions, so you > > _can_ run apt on pool and choose the version of your liking. > > But that's an entirely different point. > > > > In simple words: if you want safe stuff, ``working''. If you're > > willing to run risks, ``pool''. Period. > > There is a big difference between the risks of current unstable and > current project/experimental. As I said, I'm willing to take the risks of > the first, and I'm not willik to take the risks of the second. I expect > that the ``working'' set will be much more stable than current unstable. Point against experimental: The pool will support multiple versions of a same package. So you can choose wich one to use. So experimental becomes redundant. > Now lets take this: how does the maintainer decide if a package in the > ``pool'' can be promoted ? If there are lots of people who tested it... > I (and probably lots of others) wouldn't test it because the risks here > are higher then in current unstable. So how does it get tested well ? Yes of course _someone_ has to run stuff from pool. If I seemed to say otherwise, I expressed myself poorly. I just don't want to over-incentivate people to do that. It's like, it should be there, but with a big red flashing sign. > Please explain the situation with the current dpkg packages in unstable > and project experimental. Remember, I want the latest from the NMU series, > and I don't want dpkg 1.5.x yet. This would require modification to apt. Then "apt-get install dpkg" would get the one in "working", (let's assume it's 1.4.1) and "apt-get install dpkg/1.4.1.16" would get 1.4.1.16 from pool. If you wanted one that's currently in experimental, you could do "apt-get install dpkg/1.5.4". If you wanted the latest on the NMU series, "apt-get install dpkg/1.4.1." or something. []s, |alo +---- -- I am Lalo of deB-org. You will be freed. Resistance is futile. http://www.webcom.com/lalo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp key in the web page Debian GNU/Linux --- http://www.debian.org Brazil of Darkness - http://www.webcom.com/lalo/BroDar