Ubuntu volatile?

[Guy Van Sanden]

It would be nice to start a project like Debian volatile, specially since Dapper will be out there for 5 years.

From their site (http://volatile.debian.net/).:

"Some packages aim at fast moving targets like spam filtering and virus scanning, and even via using updated virus patterns, this doesn't really work for the full time of a stable release. The main issue of volatile is to allow system administrators to update their systems in a nice, consistent way without getting the drawbacks of using unstable, even without getting the drawback for the selected packages."

[Vassilis Pandis (pandisv)]

Thanks for your report. This sounds like a good idea. This is not where you should place such requests though -your idea might get more attention and have the possibility of being implemented if you would submit a specification for this.

You should first check whether it already exists at the Ubuntu specs
page (https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+specs) in Launchpad. If
that is the case, feel free to contact the drafter of that spec about
your comments/suggestions. Otherwise you can start writing a spec
following the steps described in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FeatureSpecifications.

[John Dong (jdong)]

I agree that this is a good idea and rides along the lines of Backports, but it will have to be a different kind of effort. A Ubuntu volatile repository will require deep involvement of the Ubuntu developers. I'd love to have a Ubuntu volatile repository too!

Please spec something up so we can more formally discuss this.

[Paul Bransford (draeath)]

I've created a blueprint for this, see here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/volatile-repository

[Paul Bransford (draeath)]

Guy, I've subscribed you to the blueprint, since it was your report to begin with. I've also linked it back to this bug.

[Phillip Susi (psusi)]

This sort of idea needs to be kicked around on the devel mailing list. In fact, it and a number of related ideas have been, and several have been implemented since this bug was filed. Since this report is not well described, I'm going to go ahead and close it now.