| 1 |
A few points... |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 15:55, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 4 |
> There are two main issues that I want to focus on as possible alternatives |
| 5 |
> for implementing this GLEP. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> 1) Tarballs for main tree, rsync for security/bugfixes. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Several folks have indicated that they feel quarterly updates are too |
| 10 |
> frequent. I personally feel that semi-annual or annual updates are too |
| 11 |
> infrequent and put us at risk of contracting Debian Stable-itis. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> One alternative I thought of (inspired by a suggestion from Spider) was to |
| 14 |
> create and distribute each quarterly release as a tbz2 and then have a |
| 15 |
> single rsync tree that only contains security updates and bugfixes. These |
| 16 |
> off-cycle changes would, as Spider suggested, be made available via an |
| 17 |
> overlay to avoid corrupting the original tree. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I think this tarball idea is very good.. Debian Stable has actually many |
| 20 |
good things that we should emulate, one of them being stability (ie it |
| 21 |
doesnt change often) and the other being stability (it has very good |
| 22 |
QA)... Its much easier to keep more tarballs on the mirrors without |
| 23 |
overloading them too.. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> The main disadvantages I can see with this are: |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> * Requires portage support to work. (or users will have to do a lot |
| 28 |
> of manual syncing) The original GLEP requires no changes to portage. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Why new portage support? Upgrading would be "rm -rf |
| 31 |
/usr/portage-stable/*; tar xzvf -C /usr/portage-stable/ tarball.tbz2 or |
| 32 |
something like that.. Having it as non-rsync is actually a feature... I |
| 33 |
dont want to update my stable tree by mistake! |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> * Could cause problems if some of the security updates have newer deps that |
| 36 |
> are otherwise not included in the stable tree. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Security updates should be back-ported if the deps can't be met... I |
| 39 |
dont see how we can get around that... and call it stable... But that's |
| 40 |
not an infrastructure matter, I agree.. But as soon as anything called |
| 41 |
like stable is implemented we are going to have to discuss QA stuff.. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
I can volunteer to help maintain a very stable tree... |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
-- |
| 46 |
Olivier Crête |
| 47 |
tester@g.o |
| 48 |
Gentoo Developer |
Archives