Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts?
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 23:22:56
Message-Id: 20170724232244.GT12397@stuge.se
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts? by Sergei Trofimovich
1 Thank you for working on this.
2
3 Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
4 > Can this proposal make a difference and make gentoo better and
5 > easier to work with?
6 >
7 > Does it try to attack the right thing?
8 >
9 > Does it completely miss the point?
10
11 I hold a perhaps radical view: I would like to simply remove stable.
12
13 I continue to feel that maintaining two worlds (stable+unstable)
14 carries with it an unneccessary cost.
15
16 Based solely on how excellently unstable (and similar approaches before
17 using Gentoo) works for me in practice, I believe that skipping stable
18 and instead focusing efforts on resolving problems reported in unstable
19 a little quicker would yield a much better end result - and would net
20 positive dev time.
21
22
23 > Does it sound fun?
24
25 Sorry, no, not to me. It sounds like "double" overhead. :\
26
27
28 I consider dev time a precious resource. Devs should need to do as
29 few things as possible, to keep things going, and should be able to
30 immediately reuse as much input from the wider community as possible.
31
32 More troubleshooting and fixing "hard" problems, less routine work.
33
34
35 //Peter

Replies