On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 01:57:15AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 05:04:43PM +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > <quote who="Jeff Waugh">
> > 
> > (A good example is the GNOME 2.0 stuff in sid at the moment. They're meant
> > to be shipping GNOME 2.0.x, 
> 
> Why not the actualy "not fit for release ... yet" stuff?

My layperson's understanding is that *Debian* is testing their distribution,
not the upstream software.  The aim of Debian stable is to be stable, which
probably means using designated stable releases of upstream software in most
cases.  The aim of Debian testing and Debian unstable is to prepare and test
the next release of Debian stable -- and so there wouldn't be much point
putting bleeding edge stuff in unstable and testing that, unless that
bleeding edge was destined for the next Debian stable release.

Basically the difference seems to me that Debian unstable is for developing
the next version of Debian, but something like GNOME unstable is for
developing the next version of GNOME.  

If Debian's schedule for the next version of stable aligns favourably with
the next version of an upstream release, it might make sense for Debian to
track the unstable version of that package... but I'm not a Debian
developer, so this is basically all guesswork on my part :)

-Andrew.

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug

Reply via email to