Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 05:42:23PM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > Testing is by design all-or-nothing. As long as a single architecture > hasn't buildd support for t-p-u, the buildd support for t-p-u is as > good as missing. This isn't "by design", it's simply the policy which is current

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 03:12:40AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote: > Wouldn't those "numbers" be something that popularity-contest could > produce? Maybe that grants a wishlist bug Dunno; I tend to think self identification of distro is probably better than trying to automaticall

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 01:36:16AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 06:48:31AM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote: > > There are package that never enter testing and nobody notice because > > everyone use unstable (sometimes because of buggy dependencies). > > This isn't true: http://

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I haven't seen much need here. It's usually possible to track > down earlier package versions if I really need through, from Debian, or > snapshot.debian.net, or out of date mirrors (:)). Well it was handy to have my originals here when gnu.org was co

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

* Marcelo E. Magallon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041026 09:35]: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:37:21AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since. > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/09/msg5.html > > > "We are also still missing

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On 24/10/2004 Mike Hommey wrote: > If people test unstable, then it's unstable we should release, not > testing. As somebody said in this thread not enough people are trying > testing, and that's one of our problems in the release cycle. just to say that, i know of many debian users (me included)

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

> Steve Langasek > It is not correct. At the time testing freezes for sarge, there are likely > to be many packages in unstable which either have no version in testing, or > have older versions in testing. The list of such packages is always visible > at

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:44:35AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > said: > > > > Manoj Sri

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:28:20 +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > Hi, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > >> Is there really a developer out there that doesn't do even the most >> rudimentary VC by keeping copies of all the source packages he has >> uploaded/worked on ? > > What for? You can always

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:25:48PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > >> Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were > >> working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:37:21AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since. > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004/09/msg5.html > > "We are also still missing official autobuilders for > > testing-proposed-updates on alpha

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 03:48:04AM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote: > On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:04:41 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As soon as testing is strictly equal to unstable regarding package > > versions, testing is roughly ready for release. > If Jérôme's observation is

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:37:21AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >> This is incorrect, t-p-u is indeed supported by buildds -- though > >> this paragraph seems to be more like a rant than anything else. > > Okay, it's a month old, but there hasn't been any since. > > http://lists.debian.org/deb

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 06:48:31AM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote: > There are package that never enter testing and nobody notice because > everyone use unstable (sometimes because of buggy dependencies). This isn't true: http://www.debian-administration.org/?poll=3 Sure, it's a tiny enough sample th

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Mike Hommey wrote: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 07:53:27AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Err... experimental ABI changes are for experimental. Confirmed ABI > > and API changes are for unstable (or whatever you want to call the > > development branch). We must not hide those changes from the fut

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:04:41 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As soon as testing is strictly equal to unstable regarding package > versions, testing is roughly ready for release. I think this observation is acute -- as applied to the _current_ "testing" mechanism. Personally, I v

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> That is a simple branching issue in the version control >> system, no? > > A huge rush of air fills the list as hundreds of developers fill their > lungs to collectively say "I don't use version control"... AFAIK, it has nothing to do with VC.

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Hi, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > Is there really a developer out there that doesn't do even the most > rudimentary VC by keeping copies of all the source packages he has > uploaded/worked on ? What for? You can always get your old versions from snapshots.debian.net. SCNR, -- Matthias Ur

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:08:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:46:32 +1000, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > A huge rush of air fills the list as hundreds of developers fill > > their lungs to collectively say "I don't use version control"... > > Real

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:52:17 +0900, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:11:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > [...] >> If unstable is not a distribution, what the hell is the point of >> having all the paraphernalia of unstable around? The whole point >> of uplo

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 07:53:27AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > Err... experimental ABI changes are for experimental. Confirmed ABI > and API changes are for unstable (or whatever you want to call the > development branch). We must not hide those changes from the future > stable distribution s

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > Is there really a developer out there that doesn't do even the most > rudimentary VC by keeping copies of all the source packages he has > uploaded/worked on ? FWIW: I've heard so... Regards, Joey -- MIME - broken solution for a broken design. -- R

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Mike Hommey wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:14:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > > > And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against > > > testing, when er try to freeze testing ? > > > >

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:11:51AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: [...] > If unstable is not a distribution, what the hell is the point > of having all the paraphernalia of unstable around? The whole point > of uploading to unstable is to have people test packages in > unstable. If peop

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:27:41 +0900, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:14:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> said: >> >> > And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against >

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:46:32 +1000, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Okay, that's

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >>> Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:14:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against > > testing, when er try to freeze testing ? > > Libraries. If you build agai

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:40:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, J?r?me Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's > >>> quite painful. > >> > >> C

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Francesco Paolo Lovergine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> >> Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's >> >> quite painful. >> > >> >Could you elaborate o

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

* Matthias Urlichs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041023 23:00]: > Hi, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > Secondly, buildd's do > > not work with experimental. > That can be fixed quite easily. In fact, my own (personal) buildds do it. Actually, I'm also building experimental packages, for mips, hppa, sparc an

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Hi, Eduard Bloch wrote: > In this respect, I think that Testing was a bad solution. A pseudo > solution for mixed social/technical problems that have been declared as > technical problems and the solution became a disaster. Actually, I disagree. The social problem of "people don't like it when we

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Hi, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Secondly, buildd's do > not work with experimental. That can be fixed quite easily. In fact, my own (personal) buildds do it. -- Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

#include * Manoj Srivastava [Sat, Oct 23 2004, 12:27:03AM]: > >> it. This is how we fix problems in Debian: hide them, then propose > >> General Resolutions. > > > And your point is..? > > That a GR on technical issues is moronic? Who declares them as "technical issues"? > > different

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:54:05 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's >>> quite painful. >> >> Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful? > Probably because you nee

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's > >> quite painful. > > > > Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful? > > Probably because you need m

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 08:56:45AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Oh, it would be easy for me to break the tetex-packages (and cause lots > > of FTBFS bugs) just by applying all the great ideas about improved > > packaging that I have in mind. No upstrea

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> >Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful? > >> Probably because you need maintain packages for both unstable and >> testing at

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful? > Probably because you need maintain packages for both unstable and > testing at the same time. This is exactly what happened

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I forgot to add "in Debian". No need to be harsh. > > I'm not sure why you think it's harsh of me to refute a bald, > unsubstantiated assertion about what someone else believes -- which is what > your comment is, with or without the "in Debian". If Co

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Oct 22, Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Canonical work because they consist of a small set of people that work > together and who don't let egos get in the way. They work because they > have a strong leader who provides firm direction. They work because they > don't have the flaws

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 12:35:11PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Nonetheless, you won't deny it makes things significantly slower. >> By saying that it makes a negligible difference, he *did* deny that it makes >> things significantly slower. > I fo

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Nonetheless, you won't deny it makes things significantly slower. > > By saying that it makes a negligible difference, he *did* deny that it makes > things significantly slower. I forgot to add "in Debian". No need to be harsh. -- Jérôme Marant ht

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success >> of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at >> most popular architectures only? > > Supporting a reduced rang

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 06:39:20AM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success > >> of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at > >> most popular architectures only? > > I

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Testing scripts are a gatekeeper against mistakes from unstable. >> Upload debian-specific changes to unstable doesn't necessarily mean >> there won't be side effects that shall not enter testing. > > Why not just leave freeze testing, and crea

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Not true. People were mostly twiddling their thumbs. Only a small >>> subset of people can actually help in fixing RC bugs. > >> Are you talking about skills? > > Yes. Recently, I tried fixing a selinux issue with ... > Now, I have time

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Okay, that's what t-p-u is roughly for, but the fact is that it's >> quite painful. > > Could you elaborate on that? Why is it so painful? Probably because you need maintain packages for both unstable and testing at the same time. -- Jérôme

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I don't think so. Dinstall would reject any new upstream release. >> Approvals would only apply to t-p-u just like it is done currently. > > Umm. So no new debian native packages? Even though those are Debian native packages are someway a sp

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 06:36:26 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >>> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> > When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the >>>

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:48 +0900, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > And why not, instead of freezing unstable, make it build against > testing, when er try to freeze testing ? Libraries. If you build against a library version that is no longer in unstable, then you may have issu

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 06:54:17 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >>> Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were >>> working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug >>> horizons, >> >> Not true. People were mostly twiddling their thumbs. Only a small >

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I don't think so. Dinstall would reject any new upstream release. >> Approvals would only apply to t-p-u just like it is done >> currently. > > Oh, it would be easy for me to break the tetex-packages (and cause lots > of FTBFS bugs) just by applying all

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >>> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> > When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the problems >>> > was that many update

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: w >> I think it would be marginal. After all, the experimental >> distribution does exit for this purpose and nonetheless, people do >> not neglect unstable. > > I do not think you understand what the experimental > distribution is, and how it is

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:20:51 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> Debian developers, on the contrary, run unstable and rarely run >> testing, which means that they don't really know about the shape of >> what they release. > > Th

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success >> of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at >> most popular architectures only? > > In my experience as both a Canonical employee and a Debian developer, > t

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the problems >> > was that many updates were blocked by that, and once the freeze was >>

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:04:41 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> What do you think we'd get by combining both (testing + unstable >>> freeze)? >> >> If you freeze unstable anyway, you are blocking the updates -- and >> thus have all t

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Am Fr, den 22.10.2004 schrieb Eduard Bloch um 22:26: > #include > * D. Starner [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 11:31:10AM]: > Or do you really believe that mega-threads help much? Do you really > think that Canonical/Ubuntu is more successfull because they discuss > more and let everyone publish its 0.02$ that

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> What do you think we'd get by combining both (testing + unstable >> freeze)? > > If you freeze unstable anyway, you are blocking the updates -- > and thus have all the problems of this style of interrupted > development. If unstable is froze

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:36:13 +0200, Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> include > * Jérôme Marant [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 10:20:51AM]: >> Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and >> Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing. > Jerome, please, you could have

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:57:15 +0200, Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> include > * Romain Francoise [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 06:04:12PM]: >> > Is the entire world on crack and I just failed to notice until >> > now? >> >> Don't worry, we're preparing an internal General Resolution to >> addre

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 10:28:29PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > This is a fallacy. In the past, when we did freeze unstable, > it never forced me to do anything but twidle my thumbs for months > until things got moving again. The reason that freezing unstable did > not make me fix any

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:48:25 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Selon Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where >> probably more people will be able participate as well. > I hope so. > [...] >> > Some improvements have al

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:20:51 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Debian developers, on the contrary, run unstable and rarely run > testing, which means that they don't really know about the shape of > what they release. The reason I run unstable is because tat is where I upl

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:48:01 +0200, Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> However, if unstable would be frozen at the same time, would >>> development stop? Probably not. I'm pretty sure that several >>> would start with separate repositories and th

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:56:31 -0300, Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: jh> When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the jh> problems was that many updates were blocked by that, and once the jh> freeze was over, unstable tended to become _very_ unstable, and jh> took months

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

> But, hey, why t.f. do you not just go and fix some bugs instead of > writing another useless message? Maybe beginning with your own packages, > or looking at some RC bugs? To avoid a flame war, you curse at me, flame me, tell me what do and to boot are hypocritical in the last part (as you too a

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On 22-Oct-04, 05:25 (CDT), J?r?me Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks to Ubuntu, we now have a good example of what's proven > to work. Yes, pay 30 (40?) developers to work fulltime on stabilizing a subset of Debian. Somehow I don't think that's going to work for the Debian Project. Steve

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 03:53:28PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Canonical work because they consist of a small set of people that work > > together and who don't let egos get in the way. They work because they > > have a strong leader who provides fi

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 02:48:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > When we used to freeze unstable before a release, one of the problems > > was that many updates were blocked by that, and once the freeze was > > over, unstable tended to become _very_ unstabl

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you saying that technical choices do not contribute to the success > of Canonical? For instance, deciding to target the distribution at > most popular architectures only? Supporting a reduced range of both targets and software makes life slightly eas

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Canonical work because they consist of a small set of people that work > together and who don't let egos get in the way. They work because they > have a strong leader who provides firm direction. They work because they > don't have the flaws Debian has

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or do you really believe that mega-threads help much? Do you really > think that Canonical/Ubuntu is more successfull because they discuss > more and let everyone publish its 0.02$ that everybody needs to read? Do > you really think that the explosion of r

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > And your point is..? ..lost on you, obviously. > It is our right to hide things. We do not hide problems, we hide > possible solutions. This is ludicrous. > And before you think about writing another message, think about the > reason for having the d

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> However, if unstable would be frozen at the same time, would >> development stop? Probably not. I'm pretty sure that several would >> start with separate repositories and the like to make more recent >> versions of the software available which they mainta

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

#include * D. Starner [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 11:31:10AM]: > > And before you think about writing another message, > > think about the reason for having the debian-private ML. And why do you move parts of my message around?! To place your part of the "answer" in the beginning, to look more important?

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

* Otavio Salvador ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041022 22:15]: > Sure but not we have the experimental distribution to deal with it > while we are stabilizing the unstable and testing distribution. The > current problem is experimental is not a full distribution and doesn't > have buildd systems. Actually,

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

|| On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:52:05 -0400 || Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: jh> Martin Schulze wrote: >> Logbooks are suited for a lot, but not for discussions. They're more >> suited for experiences, statements and the like. >> >> I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

> And before you think about writing another message, > think about the reason for having the debian-private ML. The reason why debian-private exists is so people can talk about sensitive issues without posting them on the web, especially things involving personal or private things between people.

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Martin Schulze wrote: > Logbooks are suited for a lot, but not for discussions. They're more > suited for experiences, statements and the like. > > I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where probably > more people will be able participate as well. Indeed.. > However, if unsta

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: >> Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were >> working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons, >> and freezes were shorter. > > That's not true (unless yo

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

#include * Romain Francoise [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 06:04:12PM]: > > Is the entire world on crack and I just failed to notice until now? > > Don't worry, we're preparing an internal General Resolution to address > this crack problem, but you're not supposed to know about it. This is > how we fix pro

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

On 20041022T134825+0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > Before "testing", the RM used to freeze unstable and people were > working on fixing bugs. There were pretest cycles with bug horizons, > and freezes were shorter. That's not true (unless you are talking about something that was ceased several years

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal GR draft >> for exactly this issue, but it is to be made public on the day of the >> release, and better not before. We should concentrate on making the >> Sarge release ready, NOW. Do not

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Selon Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I'm thankful you're taking the discussion to this list, where probably > more people will be able participate as well. I hope so. [...] > > Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and > > Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keep

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal GR draft > for exactly this issue, but it is to be made public on the day of the > release, and better not before. We should concentrate on making the > Sarge release ready, NOW. Do not start a

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Selon Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > #include > * Jérôme Marant [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 10:20:51AM]: > > > Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and > > Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing. > > Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

#include * Jérôme Marant [Fri, Oct 22 2004, 10:20:51AM]: > Some improvements have already been proposed by Eduard Bloch and > Adrian Bunk: freezing unstable while keeping testing. Jerome, please, you could have asked me. I prepare an internal GR draft for exactly this issue, but it is to be made

Re: Ubuntu discussion at planet.debian.org

Jérôme Marant wrote: > It's too bad that interesting discussions take place in blogs rather > than in Debian mailing lists, especially for those who don't blog > but would like to participate. Logbooks are suited for a lot, but not for discussions. They're more suited for experiences, statements