Archives
Archives
| From: | Hans de Graaff <graaff@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts? | ||
| Date: | Tue, 25 Jul 2017 06:26:26 | ||
| Message-Id: | 1500963971.25461.7.camel@gentoo.org | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts? by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> | ||
| 1 | On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 04:34 +0000, Duncan wrote: |
| 2 | > |
| 3 | > Automating stabilization and automated keyword dropping on timeouts |
| 4 | > seems |
| 5 | > the only other practical choice, as unfortunately, "stale" is what |
| 6 | > we |
| 7 | > have today in practice, if not in name. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | Looking at https://repology.org/statistics stable isn't quite that |
| 10 | stale compared to other distributions. We're not doing great either, so |
| 11 | we should certainly try to improve. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | Hans |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |