Hi Sandro, On 21.12.2016 16:43, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Ole Streicher <oleb...@debian.org> wrote: >> Sure; what I also don't understand is why numpy pushes its RC and betas >> into unstable instead of experimental (and then maybe check or asks for >> checking for the reverse deps). This makes it harder to revert if there >> are problems. >> >> Sandro, maybe you could explain that a bit? > > early/wider exposure, and they tend to be of high quality.
They are still, what the name suggests: candidates, with no confirmation to be useful in a production environment. I don't see why they should ever migrate to testing (as they did in 1.11.1rc.1). Last time, we had an numpy RC in testing for more than four months (2016-05-06 to 2016-10-16)! This doesn't confirm a sigh quality tendency. And imagine that happens now; chances are high that we release Stretch with a numpy release candidate. IMO the way numpy changes are to be tested in Debian needs some adjustment. Best regards Ole _______________________________________________ Python-modules-team mailing list Python-modules-team@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-modules-team