On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 11:20:17AM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:51:56PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Thus, what would you guys say about a new distribution, "scratch"? It would
> > be a kind of extra-experimental that doesn't put its build results anywhere
> > persistent. Throwing away built .debs would be ok, keeping just logs.
>
> I think this is inconvenient as well. As a developer, one has to wait
> and check the logs, then do the real upload. Wouldn't it be much better
> if a good build with no lintian errors, no autopkgtest failures, no
> piuparts failures, etc. would just move to unstable without a delay?
>
> Wait, this reminds me of something. There was this other distribution...
> Ubuntu! They have this ${dist}-proposed.
Well, this is a false equivalence. I explicitly designed Ubuntu's
-proposed to be equivalent to unstable, rather than to a new thing that
Debian didn't have.
(Albeit with some minor differences in detail: it's a partial suite
rather than a complete one, migration is much quicker, and it's more
firmly emphasised as something that's for machine consumption rather
than human. But the software that Ubuntu uses to promote from
<series>-proposed to <series> is the same as the software that Debian
uses to promote from unstable to testing.)
--
Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org]
