Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] release versioning meaning

[Jason Stubbs]

On Tuesday 08 November 2005 17:29, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 11:54:11AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > On Sunday 06 November 2005 06:09, Brian Harring wrote:
> > > Yes we'll run aground of the dead 2.1 release (not incredibly happy
> > > about that), but I'd like to see if we can get bug fixes out a bit
> > > quicker, with some semblence of a gurantee we're not tagging in stuff
> > > an admin isn't going to care about.
> >
> > What sort of bug fixes are you looking to get out quicker? While the EAPI
> > stuff drew out .53 a little longer than originally expected it was still
> > only 30 days from first rc to final (assuming _rc7 is final). I can't
> > really see the necessity for getting non-regression fixes out "quicker".
> > At the moment, a lot of fixes go out all at once rather than in lots of
> > small bumps. I doubt the overall speed would change very much.
>
> Question is how will it scale for non-bugfixes, disruptive changes
> like cache backport, elog backporting, confcache, etc?  What I'm
> concerned about is what's going to occur with .5x when large changes
> start sliding into it (or into a minor)- basically the territory we're
> wandering into right now with cache/exec refactoring for .54.

If the changes are reviewed roughly in proportion to the number of hunks, we 
should be okay. At minimum, we should at least see how .54 turns out as there 
will be a few major changes in there already. I kind of expect .54 to do 
better than .53 actually.

Remember also that if we go the 2.1.x route, 2.0.x bugfixes can be pushed out 
quicker but the fixes all have to be committed twice. I for one am terrible 
at that. ;)

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list