| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:01:21 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of |
| 6 |
> > Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll leave the |
| 7 |
> > details as an exercise for the Gentoo developer. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> People who run ~arch are not really end-users - they're contributors |
| 11 |
> who have volunteered to test packages. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I strongly disagree with you. We do not use stable even at |
| 14 |
enterprise grade production systems and HPC setups. Stable is just |
| 15 |
too freaking old in order to be usable for our purposes, not to |
| 16 |
mention that it lacks many packages at all. We tried stable |
| 17 |
several times, it just freaks out admins (including myself) too |
| 18 |
badly or results in horrible mess of stable and unstable which is |
| 19 |
less stable that unstable setups. I do not use stable at |
| 20 |
workstations and personal setups as well. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Nevertheless I consider stable useful as stabilization process |
| 23 |
gives more testing for packages (and some fixes are forward ported |
| 24 |
to unstable versions). Of course I understand that there are people |
| 25 |
using it and I try to support stable packages as well, but these |
| 26 |
versions are mostly a burden and I can't really understand stable |
| 27 |
users. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Best regards, |
| 30 |
Andrew Savchenko |
Archives