According to Mikhail Sobolev <mss at mawhrin.net>:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 04:30:50PM +0000, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > Probably the easiest workable solution is something like the Debian
> > unstable/testing process, whereby packages are uploaded to unstable, and
> > migrate to testing after meeting certain criteria (no new serious bugs,
> > installs with only other testing packages, etc.)
> I'd like to point one [obvious] thing: Debian uses single bug tracking
> system for all its packages, hence checking whether a package is having
> serious problems is very easy. For packages in extras{,-testing}
> repository this might not be the case.
Well, that just means that there would need to be a single BTS for the
extra repository, which would be a good thing. Expecting users to track
down package specific bug trackers is absurd.
I understand Nokia need to keep a separate repo and BTS for official,
corporately supported, anything-else-will-make-your-tablet-explode
packages. So the community needs a seperate repo and BTS. But there
needs to be only one of these.
By "only one", I don't mean to limit categorization such as bora vs.
mistral or (possibly) tested vs. unstable. But we don't need a doesn't
different websites with a dozen different BTS and three dozen different
variants of libgtk.
Of course, nobody is forced to use this hypothetical central repo. But
the current situation is not what I'd call user friendly.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net
