| 1 |
On 07-01-2018 21:25:28 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> I'd like to follow this with a more precise proposal. Namely, redefine |
| 3 |
> the current profile statuses to apply the following: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> a. stable -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are errors, |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> b. exp -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are warnings, |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> c. dev -> developer's playground, not tested. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation) |
| 12 |
was the case: |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
stable -> development -> experimental |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
For this reason, e.g. Prefix profiles are (still) experimental, which |
| 17 |
means they really shouldn't bother non-Prefix people. Prefix users and |
| 18 |
developers work on an environment where those profiles are promoted to |
| 19 |
development ones, such that repoman kicks in for their work. (At least |
| 20 |
that was the idea.) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I see you (re-)define dev as "developer's playground", and I wonder if |
| 23 |
in that case it wouldn't be better to introduce a new one instead? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Maybe I'm just one of a few who thinks the order is reversed now. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Thanks, |
| 28 |
Fabian |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 32 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives