On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Joey Hess wrote: > Could the maintainers clarify what criteria are used to mark a given source > format such as 3.0 (git) as "experimental"? > > It doesn't seem to be when the format was implemented or merged, or the > amount of testing the format has had, since the git format seems as good > or better than other non-experimental formats in those regards. > > I hope it doesn't come down to one member of the dpkg team's personal > preference.
Well, I wrote the manual page, so it was my decision but I believe it's backed up by my opinion and the one expressed by Guillem: http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2008/02/msg00079.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2008/02/msg00017.html I also didn't want to refuse merging the new source package format because that's counter-productive: the concerns can be resolved/mitigated over time, and giving them the same exposure means that other people can discover them and maybe improve them. Instead I chose to mark them as experimental to show that we don't believe that they are ready to be used in large-scale (like, say, on ftp-master). Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
