Couldn't .debs that aren't 100% at least go into potato? That's what unstable is for isn't it ?
Regards Sarel Botha On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Havoc Pennington wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Ya know, I don't want to offend any of the developers or anything, but I'm > > curious about something... Why is it that Debian is always the last to get > > packages for any given product? When KDE came out, rpms were right around > > the > > corner. This seems to be an ongoing trend... Is it just because the Debian > > group is so quality concious? > > > > It is. There are always rpms sooner, but those rpms are invariably broken > in minor ways, and since there are no "official" rpms and you don't know > what the system they were built on was like, there's no guarantee they > will work at all. Often dependencies are wrong and the like, and RPM's > dependency tracking isn't as good to begin with. > > The Debian packages are maintained officially and strictly quality > controlled by Debian policy and the "lintian" script. Also all the > Gtk/Gnome/Imlib etc. packages are being prepared together in a staging > area to be sure they work together properly. > > It's worth the wait, in short. > > Havoc > > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > >