[devel] насчёт (не)стабильных дистрибутивов и веток

[Michael Shigorin <mike@osdn.org.ua>]

	Здравствуйте.
Понимаю, что тема избитая, но к концу этой старой статьи
есть ряд довольно хорошо сформулированных выводов:
http://lwn.net/Articles/340121/

So, what can be done to make development distributions safer for
a wider community of testers? Absolute safety seems unattainable,
but there are some things which could be done:

* Create a version of the distribution containing packages which
  have shown a relatively low level of combustibility. The alpha
  releases done by some distributors are a step in this
  direction; there is usually an attempt made to stabilize things
  a little bit prior to the release. But these releases tend to
  leave testers somewhat behind the current state of the art.
  Debian's "testing" distribution is probably the best example of
  how this can be done on an ongoing basis.

* Provide an indication of the state of the distribution. Many
  beaches are equipped with red flags which are posted when
  dangerous currents are present. Wouldn't it be nice if an
  apt-get upgrade could respond with a message like "the current
  threat condition is orange, you may want to reconsider"?

* A built-in rollback system which can undo the effects of an
  ill-advised upgrade, even if the system as a whole has been
  reduced to rubble. The Btrfs snapshot mechanism should be well
  suited to this sort of feature - once Btrfs is stable enough to
  be used on a root partition. 

-- 
 ---- WBR, Michael Shigorin <mike@altlinux.ru>
  ------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/