| 1 |
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 1:31 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Hi, everyone. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> I've been thinking about this for some time already, and the recent |
| 6 |
> FILESDIR mess seems to confirm it: I'd like to start a more stable LTS |
| 7 |
> branch of Portage. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Roughly, the idea is that: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> - master becomes 3.1.x, and primary development happens there |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> - 3.0.x becomes the LTS branch and only major bugfixes are backported |
| 14 |
> there |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> As things settle down in the future, master would become 3.2.x, 3.1.x |
| 17 |
> would become LTS, 3.0.x will be discontinued and so on. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I'd appreciate a brief overview of how we would expect users to |
| 20 |
install each branch. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
E.g. one way might be: |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
sys-apps/portage-9999 # dev branch |
| 25 |
sys-apps/portage-3.1.x # LTS branch |
| 26 |
sys-apps/portage-3.0.x # old branch; unmaintained |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-A |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> WDYT? |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> -- |
| 34 |
> Best regards, |
| 35 |
> Michał Górny |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> |
Archives