Draft: simple update description guidelines

[Mark McLoughlin]

On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 09:34 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> 
> > i.e. if you've got a big, potentially very broken re-base to a new
> > upstream it would be a good idea to test locally, then push to rawhide
> > for a while, then updates-testing for another while and, finally, push
> > to updates.
> Well, once a package is in rawhide, it in almost all cases sooner or 
> later enters "stable", because there often is no way back.
> 
> I.e. packages must already provide a certain amount of stability before 
> entering rawhide. A mechanically/blindly/careless pushing packages into 
> rawhide approach, hoping they will mature there, will hardly work.

Agree 100% - hence the "test locally" bit.

Rawhide is useless if it's so broken no-one tests it.

Cheers,
Mark.