* Gustavo Franco [Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:20:17 -0300]:
> * Switch unstable (release) for not automatic updates
This seems like the key of your proposal, and this is, in simple words
and AIUI, why it would not bring any improvements:
- Our main objective is to have as few bugs in testing as possible,
since testing is what becomes stable.
- Our current way to achieve that is by extensive testing of unstable;
as Joey Hess pointed out, most bug reports come from people using
unstable, and we use those bug reports to keep packages in bad shape
out of testing, and thus out of stable.
- By swithing unstable to NotAutomatic, you expect to get more users
of testing instead, thus getting more people to test testing, and
find bugs *there*. Which is bad, because bugs are discovered *once
the packages have entered testing*, which is too late.
HTH,
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org
— As the ship lay in Boston Harbor, a party the colonists dressed as red
Indians boarded the vessel, behaved very rudely, and threw all the tea
overboard, making the tea unsuitable for drinking. Even for Americans.
-- George W. Banks in “Mary Poppins”
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
