Re: [gentoo-alt] [PREFIX] Stable Keywords?

[matt hull]

On Nov 21, 2007, at 3:09 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:

> On 21-11-2007 08:49:12 +0100, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>> On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 15:57 -0600, matt hull wrote:
>>> i think we should use stable and testing in the current tree.  no
>>> different from other hurds.  after 30 days with no major bugs and
>>> tested mark the package as stable.    as you said you dont have any
>>> time, so you could just leave it unstable till there is time
>>
>> +1
>
> Be aware that arch teams have a hard job doing stable markings, as the
> entire dep chain needs to be stable too.  In other words, I for sure
> wouldn't put my time in it, so others would have to go this route.
>
>>> i would like to see this for system packages so a change doesnt
>>> break
>>> my system and force a reinstall.
>>
>> +2
>>
>> Having at least system+svn stable would be really useful,
>> especially for
>> bootstrapping.
>

not so much boot strap, but so that an update to any system tool wont  
need one.  the boot strap packages could probably be marked stable  
first since those are the most tested; how can one start with gentoo  
if they can not boot strap.

> I thought about this too, but what does it really add?  The bootstrap
> snapshot is already a freezed snapshot that is supposed to work
> (that's
> why I can't just spin off a new snapshot, it needs to be in a stable
> state).  More than often I have to release a new snapshot just
> because I
> fixed a quite show-stopping bug in the bootstrap image.  A stable
> keyword doesn't help here, as we either have to immediately bump these
> packages into stable here, or the stable version causes trouble
> once an
> update is being done.  The nice library moves that I had to do are a
> great example of this.
>
>
> --
> Fabian Groffen
> Gentoo on a different level
> --
> gentoo-alt@g.o mailing list
>


-- 
gentoo-alt@g.o mailing list