Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts?

[Andrew Savchenko]

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 18:12:52 -0500 Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@g.o>
> wrote:
>
> > TL;DR;TL;DR:
> >
> [...]
>
> Here's a data point you may, or may not, find relevant. in 16 years of
> using Gentoo exclusively, the only one time I used stable on one machine
> for about 2 years it ended up being much more of a pain than unstable.
> Actually, I can't say I have anything to complain about unstable. On my
> critical machines I snapshot the system subvolume before I update. I can't
> remember the last time I had to roll back.

+1
I do not use stable, even in production. Too few packages, too old
versions, too long time to stabilize newer versions. I'm just OK
with ~arch.

> I'm sure most will disagree with me but since you're indirectly asking for
> my opinion here it is: I think people working on stable are wasting their
> time. But who am I to stop them...

I support stable in my packages, but mostly because I have to. One
of the real benefits from the stable for me is stabilization
process which sometimes uncovers otherwise undetected problems.

Of course there are people who use stable, I respect their opinion;
they have different use cases, practices, experience. So I'm not
asking to abandon stable, just explaining that for me and my cases
it is mostly useless.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko