On Tue, 12 Oct 2010, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
On 11 October 2010 20:28, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <[email protected]> wrote:
In <[email protected]>, Jordi
Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
On 11 October 2010 12:11, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <[email protected]>
wrote:
It gets used as "unstable+1" during the freeze, since there's no better
place.
So why not create a better place?
Because of the limited utility, which I mentioned in the message to which you
replied. First, it only has any use during a freeze.
"Only" during a freeze ends up meaning "six months or longer". You
think that's a short time? It's one full Ubuntu release cycle!
With releases once every (about) two years, that's about/at-least 1/4 of
the time.
I give that (rough) figure to indicate that I agree with Jordi that
during-the-freeze is actually a pretty large amount of time.
I'm not currently offering any proposals, just sympathizing. Sometimes you
really feel that a new upstream release is better (alpine 2.02 is just bug
fixes, none of which are release critical though, so alpine 2.00 is what
we'll release with). But of course I might be wrong... but if I got alpine
2.02 into unstable despite the freeze, users would be able to test it and
figure out that it's not any worse than alpine 2.00...
Oh, eek, actually, I did upload 2.02 into unstable, in violation of the
freeze. I feel kind of bad about that.
Now I just feel kind of embarrassed and will go back to doing other
things....
-- Asheesh.
--
Tomorrow, you can be anywhere.
