Staging area for hardy-proposed ?

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 11:52:49AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > I don't agree.  It's very much the same principle which applies to people
> > running our development branches. 
> 
> Yes, but we don't put a "Unstable updates" in software-properties-gtk, yet there
> is a "Pre-released updates", which is pretty unclear with regard to the fact
> that those updates are not tested (or not widely tested) and might break the
> application or the system (e.g. a kernel upgrade which makes the system unbootable).
> 
> I agree with you that -proposed should be easy to setup and test, but I fail to
> see why they need to be in a GUI where end users enable security updated and
> bugfix and tested updates. I've seen many users complaining because
> update-manager removed firefox or openoffice (arguably a bug in update-manager)
> or because svn stopped working some time ago, and none of them knew they were
> running -proposed, nor what it is for.

The question of how this setting should be presented in the UI is a
different one, at least to my mind.  It's been a checkbox for ages, and as
far as I'm aware, this hasn't been identified as a source of problems.

It seems sensible to separate updates for general consumption from those
which are available primarily for testing purposes.

-- 
 - mdz