1 |
Markos, |
2 |
|
3 |
A few thoughts inlined. |
4 |
|
5 |
On 2011.02.08 12:03, Markos Chandras wrote: |
6 |
|
7 |
My main point was that as you move from an old dated set of packages to |
8 |
newer packages which by definition are less well tested, stability |
9 |
decreases. Users pick somewhere between the two extremes that they are |
10 |
happy with. Gentoo stable lies somewhere between Debian stable and LFS |
11 |
built live from all the repositories. |
12 |
|
13 |
> I see what you are saying. However, the 6 months testing is far from |
14 |
> what I have in mind. |
15 |
Thats what releng used to take. |
16 |
|
17 |
> My only intention is to bring a more stable |
18 |
> experience to our users. Or, stop claiming that our stable tree rocks |
19 |
> and Gentoo is perfect for servers because it is not. Ye ye ye I know |
20 |
> that many many of you have Gentoo on servers but do not forget that |
21 |
> you |
22 |
> are developers and you know your way around during breakages. Yes, |
23 |
> stable tree breaks FAR TOO often. I blame myself for my arch testing |
24 |
> of |
25 |
> course however I can't do much about that. |
26 |
[snip] |
27 |
|
28 |
For servers I can point you at the stillborn Gentoo-LAMP project. I |
29 |
don't remember much more than its name. Google seems to have forgotten |
30 |
it too. |
31 |
|
32 |
A big part of the problem comes from being a meta-distro. Everyones |
33 |
Gentoo is different and we we cannot test all combinations to ensure |
34 |
everyone is ok. |
35 |
|
36 |
More testing will not eliminate the issue but would catch some |
37 |
problems. There would be less breakage but not zero. There is a trade |
38 |
off to be made there by both the developers doing the testing and |
39 |
the users experiencing the breakage. |
40 |
|
41 |
I agree that given more resources, the tree could be improved but |
42 |
before we move in that direction, I would like to ask is that the best |
43 |
use of resources? |
44 |
|
45 |
As I said above, users are aware of the trade offs involved in choosing |
46 |
Gentoo. Are our users really unhappy, or are they just looking for help |
47 |
to fix issues when they occur? |
48 |
Most users do not expect a zero issue upgrade path. |
49 |
|
50 |
[snip] |
51 |
> |
52 |
> Our stable tree is definitely not suitable for server usage unless |
53 |
> you have plenty of free time to |
54 |
> deal with stupid upgrades because nobody, for example, cared to write |
55 |
> a |
56 |
> proper elog or news item. |
57 |
[snip] |
58 |
> |
59 |
> Either you like it or not, arch teams are understaffed. All of them. |
60 |
All of Gentoo is understaffed. |
61 |
|
62 |
> Therefore we cannot afford a updated stable tree with high QA around |
63 |
> it. We need to find a more efficient way to test packages on testing |
64 |
> tree so we can mark them stable with minimal time and cpu cost. We |
65 |
> need |
66 |
> dedicated build boxes, like Diego's tinderbox, to test the testing |
67 |
> tree |
68 |
> over and over against critical/common/trivial QA problems. If we |
69 |
> manage |
70 |
> that, moving packages from testing->stable will be much more time |
71 |
> efficient and we can guarantee a high quality stable tree. |
72 |
If this means a more up to date stable tree, that has to be good as the |
73 |
stable tree will move closer to testing and there will be fewer |
74 |
packages to maintain. (Counting different versions as packages) |
75 |
> |
76 |
> ps1: Personally I have stopped suggesting gentoo stable for server |
77 |
> usage |
78 |
> and I always suggest testing to new users. |
79 |
|
80 |
I don't quite agree about not recommending Gentoo for servers. Gentoo |
81 |
is fine on servers but you need to run a testing environment for your |
82 |
updates so you know when you do do an update, exactly what in involved |
83 |
and what will happen. Without your own testing, your server will go |
84 |
down from time to time. If you cannot do your own testing, either |
85 |
tolerate the downtime or don't use Gentoo. |
86 |
|
87 |
> |
88 |
> ps2: Roy, this is not a personal attack. Do not misinterpret my tone |
89 |
> :) |
90 |
|
91 |
I see no personal attack in your words. |
92 |
> |
93 |
> Regards, |
94 |
> -- |
95 |
> Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 |
96 |
> |
97 |
I'll buy you a <insert_refreshment_of_your_choice> next time we meet. |
98 |
|
99 |
-- |
100 |
Regards, |
101 |
|
102 |
Roy Bamford |
103 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
104 |
gentoo-ops |
105 |
forum-mods |
106 |
trustees |