I'm replying to two messages here. Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński wrote: > We've kept the 'stable' dead for a while now. What do you think about > pointing the 'stable' symlink at dublin and the 'testing' symlink at > kiel?
I'd definitely be in favour. The old stable release is way too ancient and it is a lot easier for users to understand if our naming is meaningful. To what extent have fixed packages been moved to dublin since it was frozen? Has it relied on a single person or could any maintainer run integrate_catalogs.py if they had fixed a critical issue. Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński wrote: > I'd like to hand over the unstable→testing integration to someone > else. It's a periodic task, where you take an existing state of > unstable, create a list of operations to bring testing to the same > state, then you review the list and if it looks good, you execute it. > If it doesn't look good (e.g. there's a broken package in unstable), > you manually remove this package from the list. I'm tempted to take on this task though in a normal situation my use of unstable can be limited. For the systems at my work, I ended up creating my own stable release by taking a snapshot from unstable as it then was and grabbing newer packages in those cases where there were problems. It was easier to use unstable as a starting point because I needed some extra things that were broken or missing at that time. This was before dublin and stable at that time was already old. We've got new hardware and I'm currently preparing a similar snapshot based on kiel. Perhaps I should use dublin but kiel seemed stable on the test machine. The result is that at the moment I'm testing and using unstable quite thoroughly. What is the intended schedule for kiel being frozen? Oliver _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list maintainers@lists.opencsw.org https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
