On 04/25/2016 11:45 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Alex M <tech_...@wildintellect.com> wrote:
Historically we haven't done a great job of keeping stable very
relevant, but people running servers in production really ought to be
using it and not unstable. Maybe a clearer policy on when things should
move to stable needs to be made (it is ok for some packages to be the
same version as unstable).
With quite DebianGIS quite up-to-date, Ubuntu already has rather
recent versions of most packages. I think stable becomes perhaps even
less relevant. For non-LTS releases I think we should not use it
(well, never say never). For LTS releases, I think the policy of
copying whatever gets on OSGeo live after the release is quite a good
policy. It gets a lot of testing.
Kind Regards,
Johan
_______________________________________________
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
+1 to rename testing to experimental. Actually I have started building
everything based on gdal 2.0 there already.
Also, +1 for a policy to copy everything from OSGeoLive after release.
Best,
Angelos
--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
_______________________________________________
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
