On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 05:42:23PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
Testing is by design all-or-nothing. As long as a single architecture
hasn't buildd support for t-p-u, the buildd support for t-p-u is as
good as missing.
This isn't by design, it's simply the policy which is currently
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 03:12:40AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
Wouldn't those numbers be something that popularity-contest could
produce? Maybe that grants a wishlist bug
Dunno; I tend to think self identification of distro is probably
better than trying to automatically
* Marcelo E. Magallon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041026 09:35]:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:37:21AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/09/msg5.html
We are also still missing official
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Shrug I haven't seen much need here. It's usually possible to track
down earlier package versions if I really need through, from Debian, or
snapshot.debian.net, or out of date mirrors (:)).
Well it was handy to have my originals here when gnu.org was
On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 01:36:16AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 06:48:31AM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
There are package that never enter testing and nobody notice because
everyone use unstable (sometimes because of buggy dependencies).
This isn't true:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:28:20 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Hi, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Is there really a developer out there that doesn't do even the most
rudimentary VC by keeping copies of all the source packages he has
uploaded/worked on ?
What for? You can always get your
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:44:35AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL
Steve Langasek
It is not correct. At the time testing freezes for sarge, there are likely
to be many packages in unstable which either have no version in testing, or
have older versions in testing. The list of such packages is always visible
at
On 24/10/2004 Mike Hommey wrote:
If people test unstable, then it's unstable we should release, not
testing. As somebody said in this thread not enough people are trying
testing, and that's one of our problems in the release cycle.
just to say that, i know of many debian users (me included)
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:46:32 +1000, Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, that's what t-p-u is
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:27:41 +0900, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:14:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against
testing,
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:11:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[...]
If unstable is not a distribution, what the hell is the point
of having all the paraphernalia of unstable around? The whole point
of uploading to unstable is to have people test packages in
unstable.
If people
Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:14:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against
testing, when er try to freeze testing ?
Libraries. If
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Is there really a developer out there that doesn't do even the most
rudimentary VC by keeping copies of all the source packages he has
uploaded/worked on ?
FWIW: I've heard so...
Regards,
Joey
--
MIME - broken solution for a broken design. --
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 07:53:27AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Err... experimental ABI changes are for experimental. Confirmed ABI
and API changes are for unstable (or whatever you want to call the
development branch). We must not hide those changes from the future
stable distribution
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:52:17 +0900, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:11:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
[...]
If unstable is not a distribution, what the hell is the point of
having all the paraphernalia of unstable around? The whole point
of uploading to
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:08:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:46:32 +1000, Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
A huge rush of air fills the list as hundreds of developers fill
their lungs to collectively say I don't use version control...
Really? Good
Hi, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Is there really a developer out there that doesn't do even the most
rudimentary VC by keeping copies of all the source packages he has
uploaded/worked on ?
What for? You can always get your old versions from snapshots.debian.net.
SCNR,
--
Matthias
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That is a simple branching issue in the version control
system, no?
A huge rush of air fills the list as hundreds of developers fill their
lungs to collectively say I don't use version control...
AFAIK, it has nothing to do with VC.
--
Jérôme
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:04:41 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As soon as testing is strictly equal to unstable regarding package
versions, testing is roughly ready for release.
I think this observation is acute -- as applied to the _current_
testing mechanism.
Personally, I view
Mike Hommey wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 07:53:27AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
Err... experimental ABI changes are for experimental. Confirmed ABI
and API changes are for unstable (or whatever you want to call the
development branch). We must not hide those changes from the future
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 06:48:31AM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
There are package that never enter testing and nobody notice because
everyone use unstable (sometimes because of buggy dependencies).
This isn't true: http://www.debian-administration.org/?poll=3
Sure, it's a tiny enough sample
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:37:21AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
This is incorrect, t-p-u is indeed supported by buildds -- though
this paragraph seems to be more like a rant than anything else.
Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since.
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 03:48:04AM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:04:41 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As soon as testing is strictly equal to unstable regarding package
versions, testing is roughly ready for release.
If Jérôme's observation is
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:37:21AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/09/msg5.html
We are also still missing official autobuilders for
testing-proposed-updates on alpha and
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:25:48PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Before testing, the RM used to freeze unstable and people were
working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons,
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 10:28:29PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
This is a fallacy. In the past, when we did freeze unstable,
it never forced me to do anything but twidle my thumbs for months
until things got moving again. The reason that freezing unstable did
not make me fix any
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:57:15 +0200, Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
include hallo.h
* Romain Francoise [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 06:04:12PM]:
Is the entire world on crack and I just failed to notice until
now?
Don't worry, we're preparing an internal General Resolution to
address this
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:36:13 +0200, Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
include hallo.h
* Jérôme Marant [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 10:20:51AM]:
Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and
Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing.
Jerome, please, you could have
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What do you think we'd get by combining both (testing + unstable
freeze)?
If you freeze unstable anyway, you are blocking the updates --
and thus have all the problems of this style of interrupted
development. If unstable is frozen, what
Am Fr, den 22.10.2004 schrieb Eduard Bloch um 22:26:
#include hallo.h
* D. Starner [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 11:31:10AM]:
Or do you really believe that mega-threads help much? Do you really
think that Canonical/Ubuntu is more successfull because they discuss
more and let everyone publish its 0.02$
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:04:41 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What do you think we'd get by combining both (testing + unstable
freeze)?
If you freeze unstable anyway, you are blocking the updates -- and
thus have all the problems of
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the problems
was that many updates were blocked by that, and once the freeze was
over,
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success
of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at
most popular architectures only?
In my experience as both a Canonical employee and a Debian developer,
the number
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:20:51 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Debian developers, on the contrary, run unstable and rarely run
testing, which means that they don't really know about the shape of
what they release.
The reason I
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
w
I think it would be marginal. After all, the experimental
distribution does exit for this purpose and nonetheless, people do
not neglect unstable.
I do not think you understand what the experimental
distribution is, and how it is different
Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the problems
was that many updates were blocked by
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think so. Dinstall would reject any new upstream release.
Approvals would only apply to t-p-u just like it is done
currently.
Oh, it would be easy for me to break the tetex-packages (and cause lots
of FTBFS bugs) just by applying all the great
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 06:54:17 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Before testing, the RM used to freeze unstable and people were
working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug
horizons,
Not true. People were mostly twiddling their thumbs. Only a small
subset of people
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against
testing, when er try to freeze testing ?
Libraries. If you build against a library version that is no
longer in unstable, then you may have issues
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 06:36:26 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the
problems was
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think so. Dinstall would reject any new upstream release.
Approvals would only apply to t-p-u just like it is done currently.
Umm. So no new debian native packages? Even though those are
Debian native packages are someway a special
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's
quite painful.
Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful?
Probably because you need maintain packages for both unstable and
testing at the same time.
--
Jérôme Marant
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not true. People were mostly twiddling their thumbs. Only a small
subset of people can actually help in fixing RC bugs.
Are you talking about skills?
Yes. Recently, I tried fixing a selinux issue with
...
Now, I have time to maintain
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Testing scripts are a gatekeeper against mistakes from unstable.
Upload debian-specific changes to unstable doesn't necessarily mean
there won't be side effects that shall not enter testing.
Why not just leave freeze testing, and create an
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 06:39:20AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success
of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at
most popular architectures only?
In my
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success
of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at
most popular architectures only?
Supporting a reduced range of both
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nonetheless, you won't deny it makes things significantly slower.
By saying that it makes a negligible difference, he *did* deny that it makes
things significantly slower.
I forgot to add in Debian. No need to be harsh.
--
Jérôme Marant
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:35:11PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nonetheless, you won't deny it makes things significantly slower.
By saying that it makes a negligible difference, he *did* deny that it makes
things significantly slower.
I forgot to
On Oct 22, Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Canonical work because they consist of a small set of people that work
together and who don't let egos get in the way. They work because they
have a strong leader who provides firm direction. They work because they
don't have the flaws
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I forgot to add in Debian. No need to be harsh.
I'm not sure why you think it's harsh of me to refute a bald,
unsubstantiated assertion about what someone else believes -- which is what
your comment is, with or without the in Debian. If Colin (who is
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful?
Probably because you need maintain packages for both unstable and
testing at the same time.
This is exactly what happened in the
Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful?
Probably because you need maintain packages for both unstable and
testing at the same time.
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 08:56:45AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, it would be easy for me to break the tetex-packages (and cause lots
of FTBFS bugs) just by applying all the great ideas about improved
packaging that I have in mind. No upstream
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's
quite painful.
Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful?
Probably because you need maintain
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's
quite painful.
Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful?
Probably because you need maintain
#include hallo.h
* Manoj Srivastava [Sat, Oct 23 2004, 12:27:03AM]:
it. This is how we fix problems in Debian: hide them, then propose
General Resolutions.
And your point is..?
That a GR on technical issues is moronic?
Who declares them as technical issues?
different ways to
Hi, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Secondly, buildd's do
not work with experimental.
That can be fixed quite easily. In fact, my own (personal) buildds do it.
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, Eduard Bloch wrote:
In this respect, I think that Testing was a bad solution. A pseudo
solution for mixed social/technical problems that have been declared as
technical problems and the solution became a disaster.
Actually, I disagree. The social problem of people don't like it when we
* Matthias Urlichs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041023 23:00]:
Hi, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Secondly, buildd's do
not work with experimental.
That can be fixed quite easily. In fact, my own (personal) buildds do it.
Actually, I'm also building experimental packages, for mips, hppa, sparc
and
Francesco Paolo Lovergine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's
quite painful.
Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's
quite painful.
Could you elaborate
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:14:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against
testing, when er try to freeze testing ?
Libraries. If you build against a
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that
Hi,
It's too bad that interesting discussions take place in blogs rather
than in Debian mailing lists, especially for those who don't blog
but would like to participate.
Scott James Remnant said something interesting about Ubuntu release
management: Ubuntu people run the distribution that gets
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 10:20:51AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Debian developers, on the contrary, run unstable and rarely run
testing, which means that they don't really know about the shape
of what they release.
I would immediately upgrade at least one, probably more, woody machines
to sarge
* Jan Niehusmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041022 11:10]:
Question to the security team: What's holding back security support for
sarge? (This is not a complaint - I'm just curious)
There are no autobuilders for testing-security. See the latest release
update
Jérôme Marant wrote:
It's too bad that interesting discussions take place in blogs rather
than in Debian mailing lists, especially for those who don't blog
but would like to participate.
Logbooks are suited for a lot, but not for discussions. They're more
suited for experiences, statements
#include hallo.h
* Jérôme Marant [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 10:20:51AM]:
Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and
Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing.
Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal GR draft
for exactly this issue, but it is to
Selon Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
#include hallo.h
* Jérôme Marant [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 10:20:51AM]:
Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and
Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing.
Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal GR
Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal GR draft
for exactly this issue, but it is to be made public on the day of the
release, and better not before. We should concentrate on making the
Sarge release ready, NOW. Do not start
Selon Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where probably
more people will be able participate as well.
I hope so.
[...]
Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and
Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal GR draft
for exactly this issue, but it is to be made public on the day of the
release, and better not before. We should concentrate on making the
Sarge release ready, NOW. Do not start
On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Before testing, the RM used to freeze unstable and people were
working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons,
and freezes were shorter.
That's not true (unless you are talking about something that was ceased
several years
#include hallo.h
* Romain Francoise [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 06:04:12PM]:
Is the entire world on crack and I just failed to notice until now?
Don't worry, we're preparing an internal General Resolution to address
this crack problem, but you're not supposed to know about it. This is
how we fix
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Before testing, the RM used to freeze unstable and people were
working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons,
and freezes were shorter.
That's not true (unless you are
Martin Schulze wrote:
Logbooks are suited for a lot, but not for discussions. They're more
suited for experiences, statements and the like.
I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where probably
more people will be able participate as well.
Indeed..
However, if unstable
And before you think about writing another message,
think about the reason for having the debian-private ML.
The reason why debian-private exists is so people can
talk about sensitive issues without posting them on
the web, especially things involving personal or private
things between people.
|| On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:52:05 -0400
|| Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jh Martin Schulze wrote:
Logbooks are suited for a lot, but not for discussions. They're more
suited for experiences, statements and the like.
I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where probably
* Otavio Salvador ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041022 22:15]:
Sure but not we have the experimental distribution to deal with it
while we are stabilizing the unstable and testing distribution. The
current problem is experimental is not a full distribution and doesn't
have buildd systems.
Actually, a
#include hallo.h
* D. Starner [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 11:31:10AM]:
And before you think about writing another message,
think about the reason for having the debian-private ML.
And why do you move parts of my message around?! To place your part of
the answer in the beginning, to look more
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, if unstable would be frozen at the same time, would
development stop? Probably not. I'm pretty sure that several would
start with separate repositories and the like to make more recent
versions of the software available which they maintain.
Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And your point is..?
..lost on you, obviously.
It is our right to hide things. We do not hide problems, we hide
possible solutions.
This is ludicrous.
And before you think about writing another message, think about the
reason for having the
Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or do you really believe that mega-threads help much? Do you really
think that Canonical/Ubuntu is more successfull because they discuss
more and let everyone publish its 0.02$ that everybody needs to read? Do
you really think that the explosion of
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Canonical work because they consist of a small set of people that work
together and who don't let egos get in the way. They work because they
have a strong leader who provides firm direction. They work because they
don't have the flaws Debian has -
Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success
of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at
most popular architectures only?
Supporting a reduced range of both targets and software makes life
slightly easier,
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the problems
was that many updates were blocked by that, and once the freeze was
over, unstable tended to become _very_ unstable, and
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 03:53:28PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Canonical work because they consist of a small set of people that work
together and who don't let egos get in the way. They work because they
have a strong leader who provides firm
On 22-Oct-04, 05:25 (CDT), J?r?me Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks to Ubuntu, we now have a good example of what's proven
to work.
Yes, pay 30 (40?) developers to work fulltime on stabilizing a subset
of Debian. Somehow I don't think that's going to work for the Debian
Project.
Steve
But, hey, why t.f. do you not just go and fix some bugs instead of
writing another useless message? Maybe beginning with your own packages,
or looking at some RC bugs?
To avoid a flame war, you curse at me, flame me, tell me what do and
to boot are hypocritical in the last part (as you too are
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:56:31 -0300, Otavio Salvador [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
jh When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the
jh problems was that many updates were blocked by that, and once the
jh freeze was over, unstable tended to become _very_ unstable, and
jh took months to
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:48:01 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, if unstable would be frozen at the same time, would
development stop? Probably not. I'm pretty sure that several
would start with separate repositories and the like to
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:20:51 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Debian developers, on the contrary, run unstable and rarely run
testing, which means that they don't really know about the shape of
what they release.
The reason I run unstable is because tat is where I upload
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:48:25 +0200, Jérôme Marant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Selon Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where
probably more people will be able participate as well.
I hope so.
[...]
Some improvements have already been
94 matches
Mail list logo
