When I first started working on KDE, I made my own module in my personal CVS
for tracking changes without having to put the packages for the world to see
in fink unstable. It now has 4 or 5 core fink developers working in it, as a
waypoint on the way to unstable. It's really silly to have it separated off
in a personal CVS repository, and I'd really rather move what has become
semi-official CVS space off to the fink CVS, instead of my home DSL
connection. =)
Are there any objections to creating an "experimental" module for things that
are works-in-progress? My perception of what this module would be is:
- not mentioned in the documentation, and not part of the fink package tree
- packagers using it are not required to increment versions yet when they
change things while working on a package
- packagers are not obligated to support the packages from an end-user
perspective
- things in "experimental" may just plain not work, and are not obligated to
end up in unstable or stable
I think it would be very useful to implement such a thing, officially. The
only issue I can think of is not having to increment packages; it could in
theory cause issues if, say, I used foo's package when it was in experimental
and then submitted a bug report, but the package has since been changed, and
copied to unstable.
So, perhaps when a package is moved out of experimental, it is policy to bump
the version number to force an upgrade.
Does that sound reasonable?
--
Benjamin Reed a.k.a. Ranger Rick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://ranger.befunk.com/
"As your girlfriend's best friend, I am to you a bit like Australia."
"Australia?" "Very distant, largely uninhabitable, and with areas of
great danger." "Oh, I thought you meant having a lot of convicts."
-- Sally and Steve
-------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by:
ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
