| 1 |
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 21:45:57 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> William L. Thomson Jr. posted on Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:10:42 -0400 as |
| 5 |
> excerpted: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > It seems odd that upstream will release a package. Just for |
| 8 |
> > downstream to consider it not stable. Did it get messed up during |
| 9 |
> > packaging? Did it get messed up by the distro? The whole lag thing |
| 10 |
> > does not make sense for Gentoo. Sooner released and tested on |
| 11 |
> > Gentoo. Sooner bugs can be founded, reported back to upstream, etc. |
| 12 |
> > Speeds up development. That is Gentoo's role in FOSS IMHO. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Not so odd. Gentoo's arch-stable has a different meaning than |
| 15 |
> upstream's stable. As a long time gentooer I'm surprised you weren't |
| 16 |
> aware of this already. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
If upstream does a new release, fixes bugs. Gentoo marks a previous |
| 19 |
release stable. It is stabilizing a package with issues fixed upstream. |
| 20 |
That does not make sense. Gentoo issues maybe good, but not upstreams. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I maintained packages like iText which used to have a 30 day release |
| 23 |
cycle. Up till recently Jetty was about the same. As a end user, I |
| 24 |
needed the bug fixes. Not the delay for it be marked stable. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I stopped running Redhat long ago due to time to vet updates. I run |
| 27 |
Gentoo for the speed of being able to package and test out new code. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives