On 07/24/2015 01:29 AM, Nathan Schulte wrote:
On 07/23/2015 05:23 PM, Kyle Auble wrote:
I migrated to Debian Stable within the past year (still think Ubuntu's great, just a minimalist that wanted to wander a bit upstream). If I understand everything, I think the main reason the wine team still bothers with a stable release is for distros like Debian Stable or Redhat.
Does Wine treat Stable this way? In that it receives bugfixes/security updates (from Development, mainline) that are applicable to making it more stable/secure? From the release log, it looks like Stable is basically dead; the last release was well over a year ago. I think with
We already have a topic "Wine Stable Considered Harmful" for the WineConf in September, see http://wiki.winehq.org/WineConf2015
this scenario, as you hint at with your closing remarks Kyle, if there was a single release (no Stable/Development), Debian would just choose not to package the newer version and only release the one it believes is most stable (perhaps with Debian curated bugfix/security updates from upstream). It seems Stable is to help facilitate this (awesome!), but it doesn't actually work that way in practice.
On a high level view this are IMHO the good and bad things about the current stable process in Wine:
Good Bad ---- --- Code freeze/stabilization Way too old Marketing Release slips with features slippage Some distributions want it Distributions insist on using it Bug reports for stable are ignored
bye michael