| 1 |
On Thursday 23 March 2006 11:22, "Christopher O'Neill" |
| 2 |
<chris.oneill@×××××.com> wrote about '[gentoo-user] Re: KDE version': |
| 3 |
> I've been using 3.5.1 for a while also, imo it should stay in unstable |
| 4 |
> for now. There are a few bugs with the desktop, Konqueror and |
| 5 |
> Kaffeine also has a habit of seg-faulting. I am considering |
| 6 |
> rebuilding it with the debug flags to I can submit some useful bug |
| 7 |
> reports. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I think packages in stable should be stable as the name says, not |
| 10 |
> simply "older than 30 days" or whatever ;-) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
It's not /simply/ older than 30 days. They have to be ~ARCH for /at least/ |
| 13 |
30 days, so that ~ARCH users have plenty of time to find and file bugs |
| 14 |
that exist. It's rather hard to say a package is stable before it's gone |
| 15 |
through the ~ARCH users cleanly, so I'd say that "stable" implies "older |
| 16 |
than 30 days" therefore "stable and older than 30 days" == "stable". |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
So, really, stable gentoo packages are stable as the name says. :) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
(That said, I love my ~amd64 machine; but I regularly upgrade and have |
| 21 |
enough time to file most to all of the bugs I find.) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
"If there's one thing we've established over the years, |
| 25 |
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest |
| 26 |
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability." |
| 27 |
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives