Archives
Archives
| From: | Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o> | ||
| Subject: | Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree) | ||
| Date: | Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:42:44 | ||
| Message-Id: | CAGfcS_knht4_8R+DNDaYuymARQDofb5i267R+R0fr7ZNzDFWGw@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree) by "Andreas K. Hüttel" |
||
| 1 | On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Andreas K. Hüttel <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 | > 1) Stabilization is a simpler and much more formalized process compared to |
| 3 | > normal bug resolution. |
| 4 | > * There is one version to be stabilized. |
| 5 | > * One precise package version |
| 6 | |
| 7 | Can you clarify what this means? Do you mean that at any time only |
| 8 | one version of any particular package/slot is marked stable? |
| 9 | |
| 10 | That seems like it would be problematic for ranged deps. Granted, |
| 11 | those are problematic in and of themselves since they can create |
| 12 | conflicts that are hard to resolve. However, this extends conflicts |
| 13 | between package you might not want to install at the same time to |
| 14 | situations where you don't even need both of the conflicting packages. |
| 15 | |
| 16 | -- |
| 17 | Rich |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree) | Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> |