[Ubuntu] Stable update

[Alex M]

Renaming Testing would be fine. No one except testers should ever point
to it. The current usage of that repo is to build new versions, make
sure all the cross deps build, and then use it to cleanly push to the
Unstable repo via the ppa copy tools. This prevents use from breaking
unstable when we're waiting for something like the QGIS GRASS Plugin to
build correctly.

As for Stable vs Unstable, there are only occasional times when they
really differ. That time should be exactly when major new versions of
things come out. ie GRASS 6/7, Postgis 1.5/2.x, GDAL 1.x/2.x, QGIS 2.8/2.14

Historically we haven't done a great job of keeping stable very
relevant, but people running servers in production really ought to be
using it and not unstable. Maybe a clearer policy on when things should
move to stable needs to be made (it is ok for some packages to be the
same version as unstable).

Thanks,
Alex


On 04/25/2016 12:20 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> Thanks Angelos for the work.
> 
> I'm in favor of removing testing. If we keep it, we should name it experimental.
> I actually proposed doing so earlier.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Johan
> 
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Micha Silver <micha at arava.co.il> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 04/25/2016 08:26 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
>> ------ Original Message ------ Subject: Re: [Ubuntu] Stable update Date:
>> Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:26:31 -0400 To: Ubuntu From: Randal Hale
>>
>> Unstable has always been a bit confusing (at least for me) because we had
>> "stable" packages in a unstable repo. Maybe you could do a Stable/Testing or
>> Stable/Unstable. We've only ever had one relevant ppa and that has been
>> unstable.
>>
>> "Install your software from the unstable ppa"
>> "I don't want unstable software"
>> "That's not what it means"
>>
>> Very true. Two repos should be quite enough.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>> On 04/25/2016 01:15 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2016-04-24 22:02 GMT+02:00 Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>
>>> For the Testing and Unstable repositories, all Ubuntu EOL releases were
>>> also removed from the archives to save space.
>>
>>
>> I wonder if we really need three repos. Probably two repos - stable and
>> testing/unstable would be enough. Martin
>>