[cut-team] lightweight rolling alternative
abhidg at gmail.com
Fri Sep 10 05:20:36 UTC 2010
Joey Hess wrote:
> But here's another way to deal with the problem that seems easier to
> implement and explain. What if instead of a separate full-fledged
> rolling suite, we had a backport-like repository, tied to a specific cut
> snapshot, that contained packages that were misssing from testing at the
> time the snapshot was made. It could also hold newer versions of
> packages, though we'd want some policy about that.
Would this mesh in well with a monthly cut release? If there's a monthly
cut, then it also means that people have to upgrade each month.
People would also have to look at cut-backports to make sure that the
packages work with the current cut (or perhaps they will be auto-built,
as soon as a new cut comes out, which would solve the problem I suppose)
More information about the cut-team