On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> wrote:
> Ondrej Certik <ond...@certik.cz> (05/02/2009):
>> Ok. But we are wasting people's time. I just got another email from a
>> Ubuntu user that he will rather consider compiling it for Ubuntu's PPA
>> himself, because he cannot use debian experimental. Of course.
>> So he needs to invest his time in the package, I need to invest my
>> time in the package and the result is that it will not even be in
>> unstable anyway. :(
> (Following at home, so I might be missing something obvious.)
> What's the difference between unstable and experimental from that Ubuntu
> user point of view? If the use of a PPA is what I think it is, he has to
> fetch the source, be it from unstable or from experimental, throw it
> into the *builder of his choice, and upload that to the so-called PPA.
> How much time does he need to dget && *builder && dput? That's not what
> I call "invest time in the package".

Ok, you are probably right. So I'll prepare an upload to experimental
and other people can just dget and pbuilder it.

> And not breaking unstable at this point of the release cycle is
> something that matters, especially for late hotfixes that might be
> needed (and there still are such needs).

Yes. I am unhappy that unstable gets frozen for such a long time, but
I understand that with the current setup (e.g. unstable, testing, ..),
there is probably no other way.


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to