| 1 |
January 11, 2018 9:52 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 11/01/2018 08:43, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation) |
| 6 |
>> was the case: |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> stable -> development -> experimental |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> For this reason, e.g. Prefix profiles are (still) experimental, which |
| 11 |
>> means they really shouldn't bother non-Prefix people. Prefix users and |
| 12 |
>> developers work on an environment where those profiles are promoted to |
| 13 |
>> development ones, such that repoman kicks in for their work. (At least |
| 14 |
>> that was the idea.) |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> I see you (re-)define dev as "developer's playground", and I wonder if |
| 17 |
>> in that case it wouldn't be better to introduce a new one instead? |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Maybe I'm just one of a few who thinks the order is reversed now. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> The stable -> dev -> exp order also feels more natural to me. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> I don't have a strong opinion on this though. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Paweł |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I got the impression that it was indeed |
| 28 |
stable -> development -> experimental |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
with dev as in development, it seemed logical to put it between stable and experimental. |
| 31 |
But now that I read these comments I wonder if it wasnt supposed to be called 'developers' |
| 32 |
and then the other way round makes sense too. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Corentin “Nado” Pazdera |
Archives