On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 03:19:40PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > > > Note that both of these require a change to the autobuilders. If the > > > unstable builder is wired to ignore anything targetted for "stable" > > > or "frozen" and the stable builder is wired to export its changes to > > > unstable, then the "stable unstable" target is equivalent to "stable" > > > [we can update policy, for neatness, of course]. > > On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 12:17:34PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > how do I specify a stable only release? I have foo 1.2.x in stable and foo > > 1.3.x in unstable. Uploads to stable only affect stable and uploads to > > unstable only affect unstable in this case. > > Propagation to unstable only happens if the version in stable is higher > than the version in unstable. > > But you're right -- there is an issue if the package shouldn't even exist > in unstable (because it's been split up or renamed or some such). So we > probably shouldn't propagate to unstable if the target is only stable.
I don't think we should propogate to unstable automatically at all. It is the wrong thing to do, and will cause more problems if everything isn't synced for all archs. Ben -- -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------ / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
