[Debian-olpc-devel] How _should_ we import new changes into git?

Jonas Smedegaard dr at jones.dk
Tue Jan 13 17:06:42 UTC 2009

Hash: SHA1

[resent to list - please do *not* cc me privately!]

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:33:07AM -0500, Luke Faraone wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
>> I reverted because you updated from stable to unstable branch.
>> Current packaging does not handle multiple concurrent branches. As 
>> long as we only handle a single branch, I want it to be the latest 
>> stable branch, and thus avoid unstable branches completely.
>> I suggest leave the "trivial" packaging of core sugar parts to me for 
>> now. With "trivial" i mean things like keeping in sync with upstream.
>> I suggest that you work on packaging more activities, and on finding 
>> and squashing bugs - also bugs in the core Sugar packages.
>Many of the bugs are fixed in later sugar releases, and the current 
>upcoming sugar release (Jan 16, 0.83 Beta 1) is a feature freeze (and 
>beta1), after which only bugfixes will be made (and is "almost" stable) 
>until post-final release of the 0.84 series.

You ate stating facts. I do not disagree with them.

But what do you want to say with that? Do you believe that because it is 
feature freeze it is not unstable even though it is an uneven number?

Or do you propose that we, if following only a single branch, follow the 
newest upstream branch no matter if that is stable or unstable?


>I will see what I can do to migrate some of the activities in Ubuntu 
>but not Debian.

Hint: Look first at self-contained activities!

Example: Write is complex, as it depends on libabiword.

   - Jonas

- -- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

   [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the Debian-olpc-devel mailing list