| 1 |
On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 11:33 +0000, Steve Long wrote: |
| 2 |
> > In any event, what I'd like to raise is the issue of having a |
| 3 |
> > (semi-)official version of gentoo that lags behind the cutting-edge distro |
| 4 |
> > for stability. Is this feasible? |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Apologies if this is already being discussed elsewhere. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> I appreciate that there is GLEP 19 according to earlier discussion on this |
| 9 |
> list (from 2004). |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I guess I'm asking whether it's a) more feasible now (I'm guessing yes) and |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
It isn't. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> b) whether it's something that would have any support from current devs. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Probably not, considering even the people that were proponents of GLEP19 |
| 18 |
have dropped support for it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Personally, I would prefer seeing my "release trees" idea take off. |
| 21 |
Essentially, it freezes the tree at a certain point (which I just |
| 22 |
coincide with our releases). Updates are security-only. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Now, this doesn't mean that *everything* must remain this way. For |
| 25 |
example, there could be a 2007.0-r1 "tree" or something which is |
| 26 |
2007.0's tree, with some major bug fixes. The real question is how much |
| 27 |
manpower would it take to maintain such a tree and how much use would |
| 28 |
"normal" users get out of it, as opposed to "enterprise" users? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I'm thinking of releasing a tarball for a "release tree" next time |
| 31 |
around, just to see how it flies. The main question I have is whether |
| 32 |
we'll have time. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 36 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
| 37 |
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams |
| 38 |
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee |
| 39 |
Gentoo Foundation |
Archives