Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Sergey Popov <pinkbyte@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:20:52
Message-Id: 52D77A35.8080509@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy by Tom Wijsman
1 15.01.2014 21:04, Tom Wijsman пишет:
2 > On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:40:20 +0400
3 > Sergey Popov <pinkbyte@g.o> wrote:
4 >
5 >> As i said earlier for similar proposals - the one option that i see
6 >> here to make all things going better - to recruit more people in arch
7 >> teams/arch testers. Other options lead us to nowhere, when stable
8 >> will be eliminated or transformed into fake.
9 >
10 > If eventually our existing approach yields no or worsening results, it
11 > would leads us nowhere as well; we can pick that option a few times,
12 > but if it doesn't improve anything we'll need to start reconsidering.
13 >
14
15 It can not go to no result, unless we have no breakages in stable,
16 stable REMAINS stable. If it contains old, but working software - then
17 it is stable.
18
19 As i said earlier, problem begins when we NEED to stabilize something to
20 prevent breakages and arch teams are slow.
21
22 --
23 Best regards, Sergey Popov
24 Gentoo developer
25 Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead
26 Gentoo Qt project lead
27 Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se>
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o>