1 |
Anthony G. Basile posted on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 05:34:33 -0400 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On 10/20/15 4:45 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
4 |
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 4:23 AM, Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> |
5 |
>> wrote: |
6 |
>>> However, does this mean the hardened kernel package must stay in ~arch |
7 |
>>> since it's technically the testing version? Or would we keyword it |
8 |
>>> based on our own findings of stability? |
9 |
>> I'd recommend that the team does whatever adds the most value. If it |
10 |
>> doesn't want to do QA on released versions then I suggest it all stay |
11 |
>> as ~arch. If you're going to do your own QA I don't see why you can't |
12 |
>> mark versions as stable - just make it clear to users what stable |
13 |
>> means. |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> BTW, while they're only tracking the most recent stable branch of the |
16 |
>> kernel, they ARE tracking a stable branch, and not mainline. |
17 |
>> |
18 |
> I have been marking hardened-sources based on the grsecurity testing |
19 |
> patches as stable since forever and will continue with the same |
20 |
> practice. "Testing" means they add new features there first and those |
21 |
> new features can break stuff. We identify breakage in bug reports and |
22 |
> hold back to versions that are known to work until upstream fixes the |
23 |
> broken features. It works pretty good in practices and most users of |
24 |
> hardened-sources already know this. What they may not know is that the |
25 |
> 3.x is no longer public. |
26 |
|
27 |
And FWIW, ~arch vs stable in gentoo has always been relative not |
28 |
necessarily to what upstream considers testing vs stable, but rather, to |
29 |
the general stability of the ebuild (and patches, etc) specifically in |
30 |
/gentoo/. |
31 |
|
32 |
Of course there has been quite some maintainer leeway in that, and often |
33 |
the maintainer will choose to follow upstream stability guidance when |
34 |
choosing versions to stabilize, but that isn't necessarily the case. |
35 |
Strictly speaking, it has /always/ been about gentoo-level, not upstream- |
36 |
level, stability. |
37 |
|
38 |
So particularly in cases like this where upstream official testing is all |
39 |
that upstream makes available, any gentoo stable indicator must /clearly/ |
40 |
be based on gentoo-level stability, /maybe/ based partly on the opinions |
41 |
of other distros shipping it, but obviously not based on upstream's |
42 |
classification, since they don't even make a stable classified version |
43 |
available to the general FLOSS community. |
44 |
|
45 |
-- |
46 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
47 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
48 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |