| 1 |
On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:06:02 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> If it's a "production, critical, important" system, then what is one |
| 5 |
> doing installing updates on it directly without verifying them on a |
| 6 |
> generally identical test system first? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Now you're ridiculing the idea of having a "production/ critical/ |
| 9 |
important" system. Most of our users probably use a single Gentoo |
| 10 |
machine (I see many cases where users have multiple machines, but only |
| 11 |
one running Gentoo, or have one machine running several operating |
| 12 |
systems), and for them an important system is one that they cannot |
| 13 |
readily replace. Words like "production", "critical" and "important" |
| 14 |
can be applied as easily to the state of a company's or nation's |
| 15 |
system as to a single person's. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The stable branch has never been about commercial systems and their |
| 18 |
stringent requirements[1] - it's all about this level of quality that |
| 19 |
has users up in arms about one package blocking another or one package |
| 20 |
requiring half the system to be rebuilt at a rate of no more than once a |
| 21 |
year[2]. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Kind regards, |
| 25 |
jer |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
[1] We've had calls for an über-stable project in the past that would |
| 29 |
lock down versions and backport patches for enterprise systems. |
| 30 |
[2] I.e. when we break the promise of [3]. |
| 31 |
]3] http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/philosophy.xml |
Archives