[Pkg-zope-developers] Re: about the pkg-zope repositories

[Andreas Tille]

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Fabio Tranchitella wrote:

>> I have to admit that I personally do not any testing in experimental.  This
>> is way below my visible horizont in day-to-day work.  So you might facing
>> the situation that you are the only tester of the experimental packages.
>
> Again, I think I'm lacking of experience. Should I do something to ask
> for testing of those packages? I'm just asking myself if unstable would
> have been a better place for wide testing, and your sentece give me no
> sense for experimental repository. :)
Lets see what other people on this list think.  Perhaps I'm a little bit
to straight, but I doubt that you get many testers for packages in experimental.

>> If somebody is using unstable he is using this on his own risk.  I'm using
>> stable on my production servers (even one runs under Woody with Zope 2.5.1).
>
> Ok, let's take for example plone. Version 2.1 will be released soon (in
> few days or weeks), and it will require at least zope 2.7.7 (not
> available in sarge, which we released a two monthgs ago). So you will
> remain at plone 2.0.5 and zope 2.7.5 even for your new projects?
You will not start a new project on a production machine, right?
There should be an upgrade path from Plone 2.0.5 to Plone 2.1, right?
If you really need a higher version on a critical machine you are
on your own and should try a backport.

> I don't think it is reasonable, mainly because the packages we upload
> into unstable/testing are often already declared stable from upstream
> developers (and this is the case of plone 2.1).
This is the case for X, Gnome, KDE etc.

> Maybe we should provide *official* backports for stable?
> Any opinion about this?
If there is somebody interested in this he schould speak up.  Our task is
to develop packages for Debian and the development area is basically unstable
(that's why the name).  Experimental is for things that are *very likely to
break everything*.  If you are able to run your zope* packages without
breaking other things, there is no reason to hold back.  You might consider
filing a dummy RC bug to prevent moving the packages to testing if you
think this would be reasonable.

> Might the use of the pkg-zope-devel address in che changelog (with the
> use of "-k" switch for dpkg-buildpackage to specify the gpg key to use
> to sign the packages) be a good idea?
This might be reasonable

        Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de