Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: GLEP 19 -- Gentoo Stable Portage Tree

[Jon Portnoy]

On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 04:49:38PM +0200, Dan Armak wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 February 2004 15:41, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 12:04:59PM +0200 or thereabouts, Dan Armak wrote:
> > > A real separate cvs branch seems like a lot of extra work; most updates
> > > going into the stable branch will probably also go into the main tree.
> > > What am I missing?
> >
> > A key part of the GLEP is ensuring that ebuilds stay in the tree for a
> > minimum of one year.  As has been proven time and time again, we don't have
> > the necessary QA or control over our current tree to offer this feature, so
> > I felt it was betetr implemented by offering a separate tree.
>
> I've just heard more details on irc about the ebuild deletion problem. I have
> to say it gives me a very unpleasant feeling that we can't trust our devs not
> to delete necessary files (in this case, any files with stable keywords, very
> easy to check). And we're also accepting the fact that the main tree gets
> broken in this way once in a while. That's bad, regardless of the stable tree
> issue.
>

Anyone can report repeat offenders to devrel.

However, with 200+ devs maintaining 4000+ ebuilds, mistakes are bound to 
happen.

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list