Re: Two thougts about testing

2005-03-24 Thread Thiemo Seufer
Steve Langasek wrote: [snip] > Auto-removal of orphaned packages from unstable is also bad if it's an > orphaned library that's still needed (which happens often enough). Auto-removal of orphaned (build-)dependency leaves sounds useful. This would also remove orphaned libraries after a while if th

Re: Two thougts about testing

2005-03-24 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 10:55:05AM +0100, Erik Schanze wrote: > Joerg Friedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > reading larger parts of the recent threads triggered by the > > 'Vancouver proposal' brought me to write this mail. > > > > Over the last two years testing became more and more a second > > (alm

Re: Two thougts about testing

2005-03-22 Thread Erik Schanze
Hi Joerg! Joerg Friedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > reading larger parts of the recent threads triggered by the > 'Vancouver proposal' brought me to write this mail. > > Over the last two years testing became more and more a second > (almost) stable distribution instead of being a preparation area fo

Re: Two thougts about testing

2005-03-21 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Joerg Friedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1. The number of packages >Debian never stopped growing, and there are packages which are >unmaintained but they are still in the archive. >Hey, if noone is willing to maintain a package, wait a grace period >(30 days) and remove it fr

Two thougts about testing

2005-03-21 Thread Joerg Friedrich
Hi, reading larger parts of the recent threads triggered by the 'Vancouver proposal' brought me to write this mail. Over the last two years testing became more and more a second (almost) stable distribution instead of being a preparation area for the next release. Now there is even security sup