| 1 |
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:05 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 3:44 AM, Andreas K. Huettel < |
| 6 |
> dilfridge@g.o> |
| 7 |
> > wrote: |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> Am Dienstag, 25. Juli 2017, 01:22:44 CEST schrieb Peter Stuge: |
| 10 |
> >> > |
| 11 |
> >> > I hold a perhaps radical view: I would like to simply remove stable. |
| 12 |
> >> > |
| 13 |
> >> > I continue to feel that maintaining two worlds (stable+unstable) |
| 14 |
> >> > carries with it an unneccessary cost. |
| 15 |
> >> > |
| 16 |
> >> |
| 17 |
> >> That's not feasible. It would kill off any semi-professional or |
| 18 |
> >> professional |
| 19 |
> >> Gentoo use, where a minimum of stability is required. |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> > So my argument (for years) has been that this is the right thing all |
| 23 |
> along. |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> > If people want a stable Gentoo, fork it and maintain it downstream of the |
| 26 |
> > rambunctious rolling distro. |
| 27 |
> > |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> What is the difference between forking the repository, and just |
| 30 |
> maintaining a keyword inside the same repository, besides the former |
| 31 |
> being easier to integrate into QA/etc? |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> People who are interested in working on stable already do so, and |
| 35 |
> people who are not for the most part shouldn't be bothered by it. In |
| 36 |
> the cases where stable has caused issues with maintainers the council |
| 37 |
> has generally dropped arches from stable support so that repoman won't |
| 38 |
> complain when packages are removed. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Sorry, to be clear the conclusion I was hoping to draw is that one has 2 |
| 42 |
repos instead of 1. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
1) Rolling. |
| 45 |
2) Stable. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Rolling is typical ~arch Gentoo. People in rolling can do whatever they |
| 48 |
want; they can't affect stable at all. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Stable is an entirely separate repo, a fork, where CPVs are pulled from |
| 51 |
Rolling into Stable. If Stable wants to keep a gnarly old version of some |
| 52 |
package around; great! But the rolling people don't have to care. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> I won't say that having stable costs us nothing, but I think the cost |
| 57 |
> is pretty low. Asking people who want stable to leave isn't going to |
| 58 |
> make things any better. |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
Nothing stops Gentoo (the organization / community) from housing the above |
| 62 |
scheme in one organization. I mean, nothing but political will right? :) |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
-A |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
> -- |
| 69 |
> Rich |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
> |
Archives