Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 17:43:53
Message-Id: 20100627184330.4888ce8a@snowcone
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations by Markos Chandras
1 On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:22:33 +0300
2 Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote:
3 > > Which does Gentoo care about more: slightly increased convenience
4 > > for most developers, or considerably increased inconvenience for
5 > > users of minority archs?
6 > >
7 > I don't follow you. Increased convenience just for the devs? How?
9 Not having to keep old versions around for a few archs is slightly more
10 convenient for most people.
12 Having to deal with dropped keywords is a huge inconvenience for users
13 on minority archs.
15 > All I want is to have packages stabled ~60 days after the initial
16 > commit on tree instead of ~5 months. If arches can't do that then I
17 > don't want to mark that obsolete package stable at all. Whats the
18 > point?
20 The point is for users of minor archs to have something that works.
22 > Also I would prefer to be able to drop ancient stable packages
23 > from the tree even if that means that there wont be any other stable
24 > version for this package to use. I 'd prefer a working tiny stable
25 > tree than a huge ancient one
27 The problem with that is that presumably some minority arch users are
28 using the packages you'd be dropping. When that happens, dropped
29 keywords are a considerable cost to them.
31 Which is the decision to make: make things very difficult for minority
32 arch users, who get screwed over royally every time keywords are
33 dropped, or make things slightly more inconvenient for developers, who
34 have to keep some things around for longer. It's all down to whether
35 you think happy users are more important than happy developers.
37 --
38 Ciaran McCreesh


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>
[gentoo-dev] Re: Policy for late/slow stabilizations Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>