From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <ekarttun@mat-153.math.helsinki.fi>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_ALL,DMARC_QUAR,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0
Received: from no-spam.it.helsinki.fi (NO-SPAM.it.helsinki.fi [128.214.205.34])
	by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39EC62019EEE
	for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Mon,  4 Mar 2002 00:47:11 -0600 (CST)
Received: from mat-153.math.helsinki.fi (mat-153.math.helsinki.fi [128.214.72.113])
	by no-spam.it.helsinki.fi (8.11.4/8.11.4-SPAMmers-sod-off) with ESMTP id g246iO424717
	for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 08:44:24 +0200 (EET)
Received: from ekarttun by mat-153.math.helsinki.fi with local (Exim 3.33 #1)
	id 16hmAA-0003yi-00
	for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2002 08:41:34 +0200
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 08:41:34 +0200
From: Einar Karttunen <ekarttun@cs.helsinki.fi>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Message-ID: <20020304064134.GB17581@shellak.helsinki.fi>
Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch
Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/>
X-Archives-Salt: 277121c5-33a8-4168-a6f0-dbedb05e6952
X-Archives-Hash: 02525cedb0e11fc81b4eb7ecb84eb8c4

Hello

Now as the freeze is coming along I was thinking 
that we could have an unstable branch, wich would
be for development ebuilds which are not considered
stable enough for the "stable" distribution yet.

Currently unstable ebuilds are avaiable either
masked in the portage tree, or from the authors
homepage, which is quite unconvenient if I want
to check whether someone has already worked
on some app. 

The submittal of ebuilds to the unstable tree could
be made easier than to the stable tree, so the
core developers would not be forced to confirm
each upload. The unstable tree would of course 
not be officially supported. This would also 
solve the problem about development versions
in the stable portage tree.

- Einar Karttunen