On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 10:27, Corey Shields wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 August 2004 08:48 am, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > I guess when I hear stable, I think *UN*changing... not "changing less
> > often".  Adding "some" stability is not what our users are asking for
> > from us.  They are asking for a "stable" tree.  A single tree cannot
> > provide this.  Having a "bleeding" and a "stable" tree cannot provide
> 
> how do you provide security updates without changing the tree?   That is the 
> only thing that would change in this tree (until a new "release" is made, 
> whether that be a new CD or a new tree, whatever).

By making them additional, and non-mandatory.  Providing the newer
ebuilds as ~arch or as an overlay would both accomplish this, though
like many others, I think using an overlay is a bad idea for this.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?