Debian Sync - Re: Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)

Steve Langasek steve.langasek at
Thu Feb 28 20:59:19 UTC 2013

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 03:11:27PM -0500, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On 28 February 2013 14:33, Micah Gersten <micahg at> wrote:
> > Yes, but our britney doesn't delay migration to allow for testing of the
> > built packages or block based on RC bugs filed.  I see us getting to the
> > point at some time in the future of being more stable than testing in a
> > rolling release, but I don't see it right now.  Perhaps if we had our
> > own version of unstable/testing in the rolling release, we could
> > approach that level of quality.  However, being that Debian has
> > maintainers for each package (in theory) and we don't, I'm not sure that
> > Ubuntu has the manpower to do this type of split.

> I think we need to train our britney to block on Debian or Ubuntu RC
> bugs. Maybe this will also allow the Kubuntu developers to package the
> KDE beta updates without needing to worry about those getting picked
> up in the next (monthly?) update cycle.

It is fundamental to the model that has been implemented for $devel-proposed
in Ubuntu that we *don't* block packages in -proposed for anything other
than consistency and installability, because to do otherwise would
dramatically increase the on-hands management required to keep -proposed
from becoming a tangled logjam.  We don't want to reproduce that part of the
Debian testing experience.

We expect packages to undergo pre-upload testing to shake out bugs of such a
severity that we would want to protect users of the devel release from
seeing them.  It is indeed a big question mark how we would handle this for
packages imported from Debian, but I think that having britney block
packages between raring-proposed and raring for this would be disastrous.

I do think that while 75% of the archive is imported unmodified from Debian,
the vast majority of these packages are in the long tail that both a) don't
individually have many users in Ubuntu, and b) don't have anyone paying
attention to bug reports in Ubuntu.  We already import these packages with
RC bugs from Debian unstable; we already don't commit to fixing these in the
Ubuntu devel series; we already release these packages to users as part of
the 6-monthly releases.  So I don't think a rolling release actually changes
anything here.  And with or without a rolling release, there are ways we can
improve our response to Debian RC bugs in Ubuntu if there are people willing
to work on that.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                          
slangasek at                                     vorlon at
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list