1 |
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 19:33:27 Branko Badrljica wrote: |
2 |
> Thomas Sachau wrote: |
3 |
> > I disagree in this place. ~arch is called testing because it actually is |
4 |
> > about TESTING new versions and packages. You should expect problems and |
5 |
> > you should be able to recover from them and you should be able to use |
6 |
> > bugzilla. Else i suggest you move to a stable arch instead. |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > Your arguments could make sense, if it would be about the stable tree, |
9 |
> > but forcing the testing tree to be a second stable tree, just with newer |
10 |
> > package versions isnt our goal nor does it help anyone. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> 1. Much of the time on Gentoo using of ~ packages is not user explicit |
13 |
> choice but forced compromise. |
14 |
|
15 |
i really dont buy this argument, but ignoring that, poor admin policy is no |
16 |
excuse. blindly accepting all unstable versions of a package instead of |
17 |
pinning a specific version and then expecting a stable system isnt going to |
18 |
happen. Thomas is absolutely right here. |
19 |
|
20 |
> 3. My main if not only argument was about at last documenting such changes. |
21 |
|
22 |
documentation doesnt write itself. this isnt directed specifically at you, |
23 |
but clamoring "gimme gimme gimme" is more likely to get people to tell you to |
24 |
toss off than get what you want. the only reason the new openrc version |
25 |
happened is that someone (Matthias) stepped up to do work because other people |
26 |
didnt have time to do it. if he keeps getting dumped on, i cant imagine him |
27 |
volunteering for such a thing again. |
28 |
|
29 |
if the current docs need expanding, then they will. as for how soon, that |
30 |
depends on someone volunteering to do it. |
31 |
-mike |