From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_MISSING, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from rwcrmhc54.attbi.com (rwcrmhc54.attbi.com [216.148.227.87]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1037FABD4F for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2002 06:28:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: from bucky.dawgdayz.com ([12.231.121.88]) by rwcrmhc54.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020419112822.CMHT1102.rwcrmhc54.attbi.com@bucky.dawgdayz.com> for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:28:22 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Mike Payson To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] making %95 of users happy Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 04:34:40 -0700 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] References: <20020419101913.GB11203@shellak.helsinki.fi> In-Reply-To: <20020419101913.GB11203@shellak.helsinki.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200204190434.40788.mike@bucky.dawgdayz.com> 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: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 0d95762c-368a-4fd3-9150-b7abb7fdf353 X-Archives-Hash: a9bfa5863d0e41b04c644d124ed68391 On Friday 19 April 2002 03:19 am, Einar Karttunen wrote: > On 19.04 11:44, Terje Kvernes wrote: > > the only problem I see with using a profile is that it'll "lock" yo= u > > down more than you'd like. it would be nice to say "give me a > > stable core, but a bleeding edge movieplayer and games". > > Which is where branches like in debian help you. There are some problem= s > however. A big one is dependencies e.g. packages A and B use package C, > and need a specific version. A and B of stable use C version 1.2 and > the ones in devel 2.0. Now you want to use the devel version of A on > your stable system and have to use the devel versions of A, B and C. > Replace C with e.g. gtk and you see the problem. Here's my suggestion posted previouly to the Gentoo-user list. I think th= is=20 solution prevents the problems associated with branches, while not lockin= g=20 anyone into a system that they're not happy with. I propose the addition of stability levels to gentoo. This would allow us= ers=20 to run a bit behind the state-of-the-art, while still taking advantage of= the=20 features Portage provides. The levels I propose would be something like: Stable: Conservative, for people who require extreme stability. Standard: The base level. A few weeks behind what we have today. Current: Gentoo as we know it today. For people who are a bit more=20 adventurous, but aren't willing to accept betas. Devel: beta packages are installed by default. Only for the most adventur= ous. In addition, all packages at a fixed version level (ie 1.0) would be flag= ged=20 as such, allowing a user to recreate that version number months down the=20 road. This doesn't lock people in to a given stability level, it only changes t= he=20 default behavior of the installer & emerge. The stability level could alw= ays=20 be overridden, just by specifying a newer (or older) version of a particu= lar=20 package. These features should be easy to implement on top of the current package = mask=20 system (though I should state: I am not a programmer, and am not very=20 familiar with the internal workings of Portage).=20 This should not be viewed as creating 'branches'. Instead, it creates=20 'reference points'. All development takes place at the devel level. From=20 there, the only maintenance required would be gradually changing the mask= s to=20 move packages in to the progressively more stable environments. This will= =20 require some extra work on behalf of the package maintainers, but it=20 shouldn't require more then maybe 30 minutes of work a month on actively=20 developed packages (even less on the vast majority of packages). A more flexible package management system simplifies things greatly. Many= =20 users don't want a bleeding edge system. How often are significant bugs=20 discovered only after a upgrade has been available for weeks? And in the=20 three months or so I've been using Gentoo, I've already seen at least a=20 couple of times when packages were accidentally unmasked prematurely. Having stability levels allow the adventurous to run a bleeding edge syst= em,=20 the middle 80% can run a system that is maybe a few weeks behind the blee= ding=20 edge. And those people who need a bit more stability can run stable.=20 Gentoo's ease of management makes it ideal in many ways for an office=20 environment and servers, but when you have users relying on the computers= =20 working every morning when they get there, bleeding edge doesn't cut it.=20 Having a stable flag makes this sort of system manageable.=20