Bug#567560: new versions on experimental?

[Colin Watson]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 06:48:37PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > What I meant was that the "unstable" version is a little bit too
> > "experimental" for me. Recovery from a broken grub2 upgrade can be
> > _pretty_ difficult. This means there is a high risk for doing
> > grub2 upgrades, even if the code itself is very stable.
> > 
> > IMHO the high risk should be reduced by better testing in the
> > "experimental" branch, before a new version is promoted to
> > "unstable".
> 
> How do you feel about this today?  Probably for your needs pinning
> grub to "testing" might be a little better, but regardless, I've found
> the level of scary much lower lately.

TBH, I'm not sure we'd get very much real-world testing out of
experimental, and thus it might not make a whole lot of difference if
that were done before promoting to unstable.

One thing I have started doing fairly routinely before uploading major
GRUB changes is to test them in a farm of virtual machines with various
setups.  It's not perfect and doesn't catch everything, but it's
definitely shielded users of unstable from a number of major problems.

-- 
Colin Watson                                       [cjwatson at debian.org]