| 1 |
On Thursday 04 May 2006 05:21, Jeff Rollin wrote: |
| 2 |
> All, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> If I might weigh in at this late stage: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> How did we end up here in the first place? Isn't the point of ~arch that we |
| 7 |
> can put stuff here that might WELL be unstable? Sure, we'll get lots of "I |
| 8 |
> set my ACCEPT_KEYWORDS to ~arch and now my system is broken," messages, but |
| 9 |
> if people are going to try ~arch, or Gentoo in general, despite warnings |
| 10 |
> that it's "not for newbies" (and I have personal experience of this), we |
| 11 |
> can't really stop them without turning the community into a fascist state, |
| 12 |
> can we? Gentoo (like all projects) has a finite amount of developers, and |
| 13 |
> if we spend to much time on ~arch then surely arch will suffer |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Just my 0.2 cents (sic) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Jeff. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I think the problem is that Gentoo is falling into the same sandtrap the |
| 20 |
Debian project has been mired in forever. "arch" and "~arch" are polarizing |
| 21 |
into "stable, but horribly out of date", and "maybe it will work". |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
This leads to people trying to maintain a |
| 24 |
frankenstinian /etc/portage/package.keywords file, constantly adding to it |
| 25 |
and never knowing when things can be removed from it. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I would suggest opening a middle ground tag, where things can be moved to from |
| 28 |
"~arch" when they work for reasonable configuration values, but still have |
| 29 |
open bugs for some people. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
That way, people who prefer stability over the latest features can run "arch", |
| 32 |
and everyone who bitches about packages being out of date can run the middle |
| 33 |
tag, and "~arch" can be kept for testing. |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives