Formal Complaint about off-list development discussions.

Nick Fotopoulos weasel at
Thu Jul 1 13:19:10 PDT 2004

On Thu, 2004-07-01 at 08:13 -0700, Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> The problem is that testing is not a different branch. At a particular 
> point in time, the unstable will be branched into testing and all the 
> "undiscussed changes" that went into unstable will be part of testing. 
> This concern was also brought up during the heavy discussion on hotplug.
Yes,  but is all of unstable branched all at once into testing, or are
parts of it moved in as they are deemed ready?

As I understand it, there is technically no testing branch now, and so
when it first comes about unstable will no doubt be branched in its
entirety in to testing.  This first time is obviously unavoidable when
the devs transition foom a 2-tier to 3-tier setup.  The only thing that
could have possibly been done to avoid this was for the devs to stop
working on the book, and play the sit and wait game.

If everyone would just sit tight and stop complaining until the dev team
has had a chance to implement the community agreed upon solution all
will be well again.  The community will have a stable book, and a place
to look at whats in store for the LFS future, and the devs will have
their much needed playground.

If you want to keep current with whats going on in unstable, then you
have to bleed a bit.  (its not called bleeding edge for nothing)  That
means not always understanding everything in the book, and going out of
your way to get a proper understanding.  Out of your way = long google
sessions, logging on to irc late at odd hours when someone who does know
is around, reading bug reports, and various other common linux problem
solving methods.

Nick Fotopoulos

"Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool."

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list