Fabian Bornschein <fabiscafe@mailbox.org> on Fri, 2025/11/07 16:04:
Is this also supposed to replace {gnome,kde}-unstable? I have a hard time imagine how testing this should be done if multiple packages are in alpha/beta that might even depend on each other in some way.
This is to be discussed, but I think I would tend to keep it separated. Someone who wants to test rc releases of systemd or util-linux is not necessarily in search for trouble with unstable gnome. :-p Though someone could enable [core-unstable], but skip [extra-unstable]...
To be clear - Most of the time I consider gnome-unstable completely broken. Just a dumping ground for new pre-releases and for users who deal themself with this mess until it becomes more reliable. 😂️ I'd like to keep it this way.
I have not tested anything from these repositories... Can't tell.
Would -unstable depend on core- and extra-testing or on the "stable" repos?
At least my packages would be in a state the having stable und unstable, but skipping testing, would be just fine. -- main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH" "CX:;",b;for(a/* Best regards my address: */=0;b=c[a++];) putchar(b-1/(/* Chris cc -ox -xc - && ./x */b/42*2-3)*42);}