| |||||||||||||
Other desktop support?Other desktop support?Posted Jan 16, 2013 13:27 UTC (Wed) by micka (subscriber, #38720)In reply to: Other desktop support? by juliank Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's Fedora 18 experience
I don't see how that's a good argument. Shouldn't the ones that expressed interest in testing becoming stable (having testing as source) be the ones to test testing ?
And if there is not enough people to test testing, maybe it just means that there is not point in releasing stable (and in freezing testing) ?
(Log in to post comments)
Other desktop support? Posted Jan 16, 2013 13:43 UTC (Wed) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link] You appear to have not-universally-accurate assumptions about why people choose to run testing. For example, I run testing because I want a "buffer" between me and the very latest updates, but equally don't want to be running the antiquated versions of things found in stable.
Other desktop support? Posted Jan 16, 2013 13:53 UTC (Wed) by micka (subscriber, #38720) [Link]
OK, that's why you use testing, that's good enough, I have no problem with that at all.
I have yet to see why this imposes a freeze on unstable, on the other hand.
Other desktop support? Posted Jan 16, 2013 18:56 UTC (Wed) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] Because if they only froze testing, all its users would migrate to unstable...
Other desktop support? Posted Jan 17, 2013 7:57 UTC (Thu) by DavidS (subscriber, #84675) [Link]
> I have yet to see why this imposes a freeze on unstable, on the other hand.
Because "unstable" is the place where stuff goes that should be released with the next stable. See Developer Reference 4.6.4.1:
> This development cycle is based on the assumption that the unstable
-- http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/re...
Other desktop support? Posted Jan 17, 2013 8:05 UTC (Thu) by micka (subscriber, #38720) [Link]
I was under the illusion that you could change the developement branch of a project without impacting the other one.
Debian freezes Posted Jan 18, 2013 6:30 UTC (Fri) by DavidS (subscriber, #84675) [Link]
Tl;dr:unstable is not a development branch, it is a integration branch. Experimental might be considered a development one.
Uploading to unstable publishes packages as "destined for stable". In the case of libraries, that also means that users of this library will start linking against the new binary. This again implies that the two packages now must go to testing together. This quickly leads to situations where significant parts of unstable cannot progress to testing due to issues in central packages (think gtk).
Debian freezes Posted Jan 18, 2013 8:06 UTC (Fri) by micka (subscriber, #38720) [Link]
Experimental is not a branch, it's not self contained (you cannot use only experimental, you need to have unstable as well).
> Building new packages against libraries from testing would reduce the formal requirements for testing propagation, but would lead to untested combinations in testing
But I'd prefer that. I still think that those who care about testing should be the ones testing it.
Other desktop support? Posted Jan 16, 2013 13:47 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Can one even install testing in a convenient way? I'm pretty sure I couldn't do it using debootstrap, for example.
It all sounds like yet another cunning plan to second-guess the herd of users and make them do something they don't really want to, instead of making it easy for those who are interested to do something, and encouraging (rather than coercing) others to join them.
As for KDE being the most desirable desktop environment, that's quite a depressing statement on the topic, but not entirely unsurprising given my recent experiences from renewed exposure to KDE 4 (sorry, KDE Plasma), Trinity, GNOME and Unity.
Testing testing Posted Jan 16, 2013 15:15 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
It was a while ago when I last tried, and I did wonder whether I was mixing up experimental and testing in my mind as I try and recall the details now, but I can try again and see if there's any success.
People being able to try out testing would be one fewer reason to freeze unstable, I think.
Testing testing Posted Jan 16, 2013 15:58 UTC (Wed) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
It's possible that there was a bug in one of the packages that comprised testing at the particular time you installed it, and that may have prevented debootstrap from finishing. Such bugs are pretty rare though--they usually get noticed during the 10 day waiting period between packages entering unstable and transitioning to testing.
Other desktop support? Posted Jan 16, 2013 21:06 UTC (Wed) by pkern (subscriber, #32883) [Link]
The problem is that direct updates to testing are currently not being tested at all. They are introduced into testing-proposed-updates and nobody has this enabled.
Hence we require updates to flow through unstable. We are not reviewing all what's uploaded to unstable, although many of the uploads there are now voluntarily reviewed to see if they fit the release criteria for migration to testing at this point. Any upload to unstable still ages there, too, just like in non-freeze times. This means that the worst bugs that are introduced by bug fixes are likely to be found by unstable's user base before they hit testing. In turn this makes testing more stable and solid to be used at this point before it's finally released. It also allows some more intrusive RC bug fixes to be accepted under the premise that we'll soon find out if they're flawed.
|
|||||||||||||