Le jeudi, 4 décembre 2014, 07.46:25 Bart Martens a écrit : > On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 10:42:54AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > > Le mercredi, 3 décembre 2014, 10.20:32 W. Martin Borgert a écrit : > > > Would it be OK to abuse experimental for new upstreams during > > > freeze? > > > > during freezes, where unstable should only have changes targeted at > > testing (and therefore, currently, at jessie). > > I don't read that in the freeze policy. Do you?
It's indeed not mentioned there, although the following paragraph is of interest: > If the version in unstable has significant changes that cannot be > reversed or stuck behind other packages that are not acceptable, > please contact the release team (i.e. file a bug) for doing your > upload to testing-proposed-updates. However, please remember that > stricter rules apply to testing-proposed-updates (see here for the > rules.) The November Bits from the release team [0] have a different phrasing too : > Uploads to unstable > > Since many updates (hopefully, the vast majority) will be via > unstable, changes there can be disruptive if they would be unsuitable > for Jessie. > Please be mindful of this, particularly if you maintain a library or > key package. My understanding of the situation is that the Release Team considers unstable to be the ante-chamber of testing, and that they expect it to only contain changes suitable for inclusion in the next stable release. The problem with new upstream releases in unstable during the freeze is not these uploads /per se/, but with what they "inflict" on related packages and on testing. As others have mentioned in this thread: * RC bugs discovered in the testing version of the package ? ↳ Needs to go through t-p-u * Package is used in Build-Depends of other packages ? ↳ Other packages need to go through t-p-u So, of course, the heart of the problem is the insufficient usage of t- p-u by users, leading to /de facto/ uploads straight to testing. But this isn't easily solved: we already have three major suites and documenting all the additional partial suites in ways that make users _want_ to use these (and report bugs they see) isn't easy. Many of us developers are users of unstable: having this suite as close to testing as possible (especially during freezes) is _good_ for the quality of our stable releases. I'd encourage the RT to push even more for an 'unstable' suite dedicated to the release process. Development can perfectly "continue" in experimental. Cheers, OdyX [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg00003.html
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
