[maemo-community] Periodic cleanup of Extras-Devel?
From: Attila Csipa maemo at csipa.in.rsDate: Fri Jan 15 13:28:21 EET 2010
- Previous message: Periodic cleanup of Extras-Devel?
- Next message: Periodic cleanup of Extras-Devel?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Friday 15 January 2010 12:07:20 Simon Pickering wrote: > > To repeat myself, I would say that the promotion to -testing > > should be the lib > > maintainter's job. Unstable is unstable, no package should > > pull in random > > versions to other repositories. However, if deemed working > > and already > > in -testing, it is not a problem for another application to > > auto-promote it. > > Interesting. I think that if a package uses some library and it works, > the whole lot should be pushed to testing. E.g. I've got a bunch of Now, just to take an extreme example - imagine what happens when someone clicks promote on their Qt4.6 (or PySide) dependent application ? Qt 4.6 is in -devel, too, and while it certainly works, it's nowhere near a 'real' release (not to mention those packages will appear in Nokia repos and/or PR1.2 eventually). In my case, I have not pushed some of the libs I maintain to testing as they are based on upstream nightly builds - and would not recommend anyone pushing them to -testing until upstream declares it stable. > With that said, it would probably be worth informing the maintainers of > any packages that are to be promoted so that they first know about it, > and secondly can stop the promotion if they know there's a problem. This can work from testing-to-extras as there is the 10 day quarantine, but how would you do this in the case of devel-to-testing ? Regards, Attila
- Previous message: Periodic cleanup of Extras-Devel?
- Next message: Periodic cleanup of Extras-Devel?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]