* [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch
@ 2002-03-04 6:41 Einar Karttunen
2002-03-04 11:05 ` Thilo Bangert
2002-03-04 19:07 ` ian.c.smith
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Einar Karttunen @ 2002-03-04 6:41 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch
2002-03-04 6:41 [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch Einar Karttunen
@ 2002-03-04 11:05 ` Thilo Bangert
2002-03-04 11:14 ` Einar Karttunen
2002-03-04 19:07 ` ian.c.smith
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Bangert @ 2002-03-04 11:05 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
i agree, but how could that happen technically? setting up an
unstable.gentoo.org and rsync from there?
but what if you only want one package from unstable?
greetings
Thilo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch
2002-03-04 11:05 ` Thilo Bangert
@ 2002-03-04 11:14 ` Einar Karttunen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Einar Karttunen @ 2002-03-04 11:14 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On 04.03.02 12:05 +0100(+0000), Thilo Bangert wrote:
>
> i agree, but how could that happen technically? setting up an
> unstable.gentoo.org and rsync from there?
yes, that would work, the only thing is to create a system
for people to get upload permissions wich is both easy enough
to allow many people to do the the uploads, and has some
protection against misuse.
> but what if you only want one package from unstable?
just get it with rsync like you can get single ebuilds currently:
rsync rsync://cvs.gentoo.org/gentoo-x86-portage/sys-kernel/linux-sources/linux-sources-2.4.18.ebuild .
you can also browse the rsync server like
rsync rsync://cvs.gentoo.org/gentoo-x86-portage/
of course ftp would be easier for this.
- Einar Karttunen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch
2002-03-04 6:41 [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch Einar Karttunen
2002-03-04 11:05 ` Thilo Bangert
@ 2002-03-04 19:07 ` ian.c.smith
2002-03-05 6:02 ` Einar Karttunen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: ian.c.smith @ 2002-03-04 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
Why not just unmask the ebuilds you are interested in?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ian Smith
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch
2002-03-04 19:07 ` ian.c.smith
@ 2002-03-05 6:02 ` Einar Karttunen
2002-03-05 13:33 ` Thilo Bangert
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Einar Karttunen @ 2002-03-05 6:02 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On 04.03.02 19:07 +0000(+0000), ian.c.smith@btinternet.com wrote:
>
> Why not just unmask the ebuilds you are interested in?
The problem is that the current system (submitting ebuilds
via bugzilla) is too slow and requires too much effort from
the developers, for a unstable branch.
- Einar Karttunen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch
2002-03-05 6:02 ` Einar Karttunen
@ 2002-03-05 13:33 ` Thilo Bangert
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Bangert @ 2002-03-05 13:33 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On Tuesday, 5. March 2002 07:02, you wrote:
> On 04.03.02 19:07 +0000(+0000), ian.c.smith@btinternet.com wrote:
> > Why not just unmask the ebuilds you are interested in?
>
> The problem is that the current system (submitting ebuilds
> via bugzilla) is too slow and requires too much effort from
> the developers, for a unstable branch.
>
this is excactly the problem, on the other hand it shows the good
things about gentoo: its growing, people are interested to help and the
main developers are trying to keep the distribution stable.....
lets not change any of that!
but maybe we still can address the problem
how about having a unstable.gentoo.org which is selfmanaged - if you
want a certain ebuild in the unstable tree, all you need to do is
register and add it. your then responsible until you give
maintainership to somebody else (or nobody, which would mark the
package unmaintained). also this tree is sync'ed with the stable gentoo
every hour. certain packages (maybe even categories) can not be
modified (ie. baselayout), those should stay in the stable branch.
or something like that...
> - Einar Karttunen
Thilo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-03-05 13:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-03-04 6:41 [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an unstable branch Einar Karttunen
2002-03-04 11:05 ` Thilo Bangert
2002-03-04 11:14 ` Einar Karttunen
2002-03-04 19:07 ` ian.c.smith
2002-03-05 6:02 ` Einar Karttunen
2002-03-05 13:33 ` Thilo Bangert
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox