On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 09:01:52PM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: > * Tony Houghton <[email protected]> [110903 17:32]: > > > There's a new release ready; should I switch back to unstable for it? > > Well, ask yourself this question: Do you think the upcoming release is > fit to be part of a stable release? If the answer is "yes" upload to > unstable. If the answer is "No, but I'd like to have pacakges ready for > testing anyway" upload to experimental.
I kind of fail understand the logic here. If the changes are incremental and the releases are believed to work well, the only cost of multiple uploads is a bit of bandwidth and a bit of buildd time -- ie, machine work. And if you upload to experimental, that cost is paid anyway. On the other hand, it is a lot easier to fix problems if the changes come in smaller pieces. Plus, bugs introduced in the first piece will be reported earlier, giving a better chance they'll be fixed. So, shouldn't multiple uploads be discouraged only if they require unnecessary transitions or are of questionable quality? -- 1KB // Yo momma uses IPv4! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
