| 1 |
> The ebuilds in /incoming are untested and should not be used by users. |
| 2 |
> But since it's available to users, users use it anyway. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I think it all comes down to what kind of distribution we want to |
| 5 |
> create. If we want to make a distribution for those that create it and |
| 6 |
> use-at-own-risk for everyone else (this is all fine by me) we should |
| 7 |
> clearly state this (to users and developers). |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Personally I think that since we're steering towards v1.0, stability and |
| 11 |
clarity for the regular user should be an important issue. People tend |
| 12 |
to ignore warnings or disclaimers and go ahead anyway. Then when it |
| 13 |
doesn't work they either get a bad image of the distribution or they ask |
| 14 |
questions on the mailinglist or irc channel about the stuff that was |
| 15 |
essentially unsupported, taking up valuable developer's time and |
| 16 |
patience. I really think that they shouldn't get the opportunity to get |
| 17 |
access to those ebuilds unless it's clearly distributed seperately as a |
| 18 |
complete alpha (or beta) branch. Just my idea on the topic. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> If we want to create a distributions for everyone we have to go around |
| 21 |
> to make users don't hurt themeselfs. Since users _will_ do bad things to |
| 22 |
> there own systems if they are able to. And if so, masking and comments |
| 23 |
> are not enough, imho. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I agree with that. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> CVS branches solves these problems (and we have to start using branches |
| 29 |
> sooner or later anyway, preferable when we release 1.0). |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Regards, |
| 32 |
> Mikael Hallendal |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Geert Bevin |
| 38 |
the Leaf sprl/bvba |
| 39 |
"Use what you need" Pierre Theunisstraat 1/47 |
| 40 |
http://www.theleaf.be |
| 41 |
1030 Brussels |
| 42 |
gbevin@×××××××.be |
| 43 |
Tel & Fax +32 2 241 19 98 |
Archives