On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 01:23:16PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Luk Claes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [071231 12:29]: > > Andreas Barth wrote: > > > * Luk Claes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [071231 10:46]: > > >> It's technically possible to stage etch.5 via proposed-updates and > > >> release it as a point release without interfering much with the > > >> possibility to do point releases without the etch.5 specific packages. > > >> Though personally I would only want to do it this way if we communicate > > >> very clearly in a wide range of media that we will be doing something > > >> like an etch.5 so that users are not more confused than they are now > > >> when there is a point release and know very well in advance if they > > >> want/should be using etch.5 or not. > > > > > > I don't get the second half, what should that tell to us? > > > > That we don't want to reply to confused users for a whole month when we > > release etch.5, that it's much better to have informed users beforehand... > > Yes, of course. We need to say "ok, we're doing this and that and do it > via p-u" - but we should do this anyways, so I don't see a difference. :)
I talked to zobel about this, and he also agrees to the use of p-u, as long as all etch 1/2 changes occur in the form of new packages. So, sounds like consensus to me. -- dann frazier -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
