On 14 Apr 2003 11:07:01 -0400
Brad Laue <brad@...> wrote:
> Perhaps a combination. If it builds succesfully with ALSA, KDE, GNOME in
> the USE flags and sufficient numbers of people report this, mark it
> stable. Also leave three prior release versions available for
> installation marked stable in case the latest introduces a flaw caused
> by programmer error. Introduce patches and fixes to the ebuilds as bugs
> are reported.
While I don't oppose your or anyones use of KDE, GNOME, or alsa, some things must be taken into consideration. I, for one, don't use a desktop environment, preferring a window-manager for my tasks, and I'm sure that I am not alone. Therefore you have negated that many testers with this sort of proposal (I for one run completely unstable). Secondly, while alsa may be the sound system of the future, it does not support all cards and some people are restricted to the kernel mods. Shorten your list of testers again. And since KDE and such require X, you leave out all of your CLI users, which will probably be your most critical old-schoolers and ex-UNIX peeps (gross stereotyping here). I think that it should stay that if it builds and runs with a reasonable amount of positive reports vs. bugs then it should go stable. I just wanted to point out that certain matters of selectiveness will negate your amount of testers, and probably work against your ends.
Registered Linux User #284015
Get my gpg public key at pgp.mit.edu!! Encrypted e-mail preferred.