| 1 |
Mart Raudsepp wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Is it stated in any documentation that 30 days is a policy? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Not that I'm aware of - it is a guideline as you indicate. However, |
| 7 |
don't expect anybody to actually take action on a STABLEREQ if there |
| 8 |
isn't some kind of rationale for going stable so quickly. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
The whole point of stable is that they provide some sanity to the |
| 11 |
release process - if upstream releases a new version every other week |
| 12 |
then perhaps we should either: |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
1. Question whether it should go stable at all. |
| 15 |
2. Pick a version once in a while and target it for stabilization, |
| 16 |
backporting fixes as needed. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
We don't need to be Debian stable, but if the only reason for |
| 19 |
stabilizing a package is that upstream has already moved on, then I |
| 20 |
think we're making a mistake. In fact, if upstream abandoned a release |
| 21 |
after only two weeks that would be a good reason NOT to stabilize it. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
End users can always run ~arch if they need to - at least this way they |
| 24 |
know in advance what they're getting into. |
Archives