| 1 |
On Friday, January 02, 2015 03:11:22 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 02/01/15 02:57 PM, Mike Pagano wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I understand your point. Maybe waiting a few days to auto stable |
| 4 |
> > makes sense, because less than 7 days later, a new version with |
| 5 |
> > bug/security fixes is released. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > Isn't our current rate of stabilization "selling" a promise of |
| 8 |
> > stability we can't stand behind? |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Mike |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Well to be perfectly honest, the current-stable 3.16 and 3.17 kernels |
| 13 |
> for me at least have some rather unfortunate regressions over 3.15 and |
| 14 |
> previous, so even with the stabilization we're achieving now I don't |
| 15 |
> think we're living up to our "promise of stability" :) |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Exactly. It may give people a warm fuzzy feeling, but it's not like other |
| 18 |
packages. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Mike Pagano |
| 23 |
Gentoo Developer - Kernel Project |
| 24 |
Team Lead - Gentoo Sources |
| 25 |
E-Mail : mpagano@g.o |
| 26 |
GnuPG FP : EEE2 601D 0763 B60F 848C 9E14 3C33 C650 B576 E4E3 |
| 27 |
Public Key : http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0xB576E4E3&op=index |
Archives