On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 09:54:08PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote: > The problem is really clear for vte. I've *never* seen any announce (I'm > subscribed to gnome-announce) that this package was unstable a,d so > broken. Nalin (the upstream) has never released any unstable package > before this one. > > Now I'll upload a new package when the utmp entry will be fixed. And > don't forget you are using unstable. > > Christian
OK, so maybe this is a case where you could be forgiven, but on my systems gnome-terminal is still *very* unstable. Unless there is a good reason, and upstream is in agreement, we should only have the specific versions of all of the software listed here: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/desktop/2.2/2.2.1/sources/ Any not any newer versions! For a large, integrated body of software like GNOME it doesn't make sense to pick random higher versions at risk of breaking the well-engineered stable and co-ordinated releases they do - especially when it comes down to libraries and very core desktop components like you maintain. Especially if they specifically asked us not to. What we also need to bear in mind is that even though this is unstable, the only path by which code can get into a Debian release is via unstable to testing and then stable. It's not meant to be the software itself that's unstable, it's meant to be the state of the distribution - in constant flux and in an unknown state of coherency. Accordingly, I always endeavour only to upload things that are called stable by upstream, and only when I'm fairly confident that if that version hit testing and got froze there, I wouldn't need to send begging letters to have it updated or removed because of many RC bugs. If you want to run ahead and package unstable upstream versions, or CVS versions, experimental or people.d.o is a good place (something the libstdc++5 maintainers should consider? =). Regards, Rob
