[Bug 37486] Re: [Bug 37486] Re: [Bug 37486] Re: UVF exception:
rails 1.0.0-1 -> 1.1.0rc1-2
lucas at lucas-nussbaum.net
Wed Apr 5 11:12:59 BST 2006
On 05/04/06 at 11:45 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> This was in Bug https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/37486, moving
> discussion to ubuntu-motu.
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 09:32:35AM -0000, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > I don't think the scope of this is limited to ruby-related stuff. My
> > current rule to determine whether a package should be updated is :
> > - it builds fine
> > - it installs fine
> > - it's not prone to breaking other things
> > - it's easy to update, or it's useful
> > We don't have the manpower to test all packages in universe. So, if the
> > upstream developer and the debian developer think a new version is worth
> > going into Debian, I prefer to think that they can be trusted, because
> > they know much more about the packages than we do.
> > (The difference with ruby is that most packages are easy to upgrade)
> This seems to me a worthwile candidate for a spec for dapper+1, don't
> you think?
> For the current release, we already agreed on the current process.
The current process doesn't take in account very well that some packages
are easy to update, while some others are harder to update, and that
some packages easily break other stuff, while some others don't.
Seriously, releasing dapper with rails 1.0 is nonsense : nobody will
want to use it, and people will just file bugs asking why rails 1.1
wasn't included, and install rails with rubygems, which will introduce
other bugs and make them hard to fix.
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas at lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas at nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
More information about the Ubuntu-motu