<p>On Sep 18, 2011 12:05 PM, "Ciaran McCreesh" <<a href="mailto:ciaran.mccreesh@...">ciaran.mccreesh@...</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 14:20:34 +0000<br>
> "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <<a href="mailto:jmbsvicetto@g.o">jmbsvicetto@g.o</a>> wrote:<br>
> > As we're talking about updating profiles EAPI, what do we need to get<br>
> > to be able to mask use flags for the stable tree, but not the testing<br>
> > tree?<br>
><br>
> Every time this has come up, the conclusion has been "it's a horrible<br>
> idea from a QA perspective, since it would mean that testing something<br>
> in ~arch would be different to testing it in arch".<br>
></p>
<p>Isn't that already true from a dependency standpoint? I do see your point, but the concept of rolling out a risky flag to the brave first does make sense. </p>
<p>I think the biggest issue with ~arch is when things get deployed there for a very long time before hitting stable. That applies to libraries, baselayout-2, or flags. Things shouldn't go to ~arch unless we have a plan to make them stable (excepting one-offs).</p>
<p>Rich</p>
|
