| 1 |
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Is there an alternative? afaik a profile can be either stable,dev or |
| 3 |
> exp. I can't see how we can implement something between |
| 4 |
> stable and dev. And what would that represent? It may or may not be |
| 5 |
> stable? If this is the case, then I believe ~arch is more preferred. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I haven't read much into it, but Fedora has a concept of "Secondary |
| 8 |
Architectures." I think it would make sense if we could keep stable |
| 9 |
keywords for them, but not prevent maintainers from needing to wait on |
| 10 |
them to stabilize other packages. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I've run into issues when I simply wanted to fix a mips-specific |
| 13 |
problem and wound up spending inordinate amounts of time dealing with |
| 14 |
general ~arch issues. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I'm worried that dropping stable keywords, while it'll make it seem |
| 17 |
like the architectures are in better shape since there are fewer bugs, |
| 18 |
will actually make using or developing them significantly worse. |
Archives