On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 07:41:37PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > Please dont. This would be a huge step backward, and mark the > abandonment of galeon in favour of epiphany. It is not a political > statement that i would like Debian doing. Why would we include epiphany in sarge? It is not at all mature, has not had wide spread testing, and is not considered stable upstream. It is also not yet in sarge. I know they're planning a 1.0 release soon, but to get that and have plenty of time in unstable and testing for people to find the bugs (in features which have been added over the past few weeks) does not seem reasonable with a hopefull stable release date of just over 3 months.
I think Debian has a clear 'political message', one which makes Debian what it is - Debian stable is really stable. This should be the overriding thought in our minds when working as Debian developers. > I (and many other people) have been using galeon 1.3 for a long time > now, and it is no more crashy than other applications which are in > debian and are scheduled to ship with sarge. Perhaps we need to make the RC bug list bigger then! Crashy should mean RC bug. Even if you can't give information about why it crashes, if an application crashes regularly, an RC bug should be filed so that people know that there's a problem. -- .''`. Mark Howard : :' : `. `' http://www.tildemh.com `- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
