Re: GNOME 2 in unstable announcement

[Joe Drew <hoserhead@woot.net>]

On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 22:02, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>   - upload 2.x versions of G2D components [1] into unstable with *2 package
>     names

Christian,

I think that given the backlash that's likely to happen, your upcoming
GNOME 2.0.1 upload should continue to have the *2 packages, offering us
the ability to later roll it into unstable (when transitions are more
established) and then into testing (when transitions are rock-solid). 

(Libraries should definitely, however, have unchanging names - only the
binary packages should be *2 packages.)

This is a small amount of work for us but if users really will go nuts
over it (depending on how good the transition is to begin with) I think
it's the best idea. (It can be as temporary as you want, too -- if you
think, after a few weeks, that it's ready, just get the *2 packages
removed and upload the not-*2 packages. Moving things to testing,
however, should definitely wait for a general consensus.)

Comments, Christian?

-- 
Joe Drew <hoserhead@woot.net> <drew@debian.org>

"This particular group of cats is mostly self-herding." -- Bdale Garbee