RE: New version of nfs-server for review

[Daniel Reed <n at ml dot org>]

On 2003-11-04T16:55-0500, Robb, Sam wrote:
) > A new version of nfs-server is available for testing.  This update
) > contains bug fixes and should conform to the latest Cygwin packaging
) > standards.
) It's been about a week without a response, positive or negative.
)
) Any objections to uploading this as a "test" package for the nonce?

I just checked the package, and the man directory is still in usr/man
instead of usr/share/man, but that is not fatal.

I will try to check this out later today, but I only have one Cygwin machine
available to me at the moment.


As to using "test", there does not appear to be clear precedent for that.

[To the list] Should it become policy for all proposed packages to be
uploaded under "test" once they have received the required votes, and then
just moved to "curr" once they have had all problems resolved and received a
"good to go"?

Pro:
Packages that have a more selective user base (and hence a limited number of
people to perform a functionality review) could be "in the system" sooner.
Additionally, it may open up the review process to more package maintainers
who do not actively follow cygwin-apps, but might notice new Test packages.

Con:
If a pending package has packaging problems, premature propogation could
cause chaos on a wider scale. Currently "Test" seems to imply the
functionality is all that is at question, not the packaging itself. I cringe
to propose an even more drastic change, but perhaps a fourth category could
be created specifically for pending packages.

-- 
Daniel Reed <n@ml.org>	http://naim-users.org/nmlorg/	http://naim.n.ml.org/
I'd say some people have no lives, but I'm the one who's going to
wallpaper his room in naim source in a few days. -- FalseName, EFnet #naim