| 1 |
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 12:25:11 -0600 |
| 2 |
William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I think there's some confusion here. I'm not trying to change the bar |
| 5 |
> for ~arch, just trying to understand what that bar is supposed to be. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
The bar for ~arch is "end users should have reasonable expectations |
| 8 |
that it mostly works for most purposes, especially those that can be |
| 9 |
trivially checked for by its maintainer" |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
~arch will however be imperfect, and there will be issues from time to time. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
However, the goal is that those issues are not the "easy to find and |
| 14 |
obvious" kind, but the subtle and hard to stumble into. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
And I see that as why we have the time interval: Because it gives a |
| 17 |
good opportunity for actual real world usage patterns to discover the |
| 18 |
sorts of problems that you can't discover by actively looking for them, |
| 19 |
the rumsfeldian "unknown unknowns". |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Because realistically speaking, ~arch is the stable of tomorrow. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The goal is for it to be stable today. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
And when it proves itself ready to be the stable of today, it becomes |
| 26 |
the stable of today. |
Archives