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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,FSL_HELO_NON_FQDN_1, HELO_NO_DOMAIN,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from cyclops (c-f21c71d5.013-21-6d6c6d90.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [213.113.28.242]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA4CAC3FB for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 10:33:02 -0500 (CDT) Received: from fredde by cyclops with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17XO8E-0003gs-00 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 17:32:54 +0200 Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 17:32:54 +0200 From: Fredrik Jagenheim To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] stable and unstable branches. Message-ID: <20020724153254.GA13536@pobox.com> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <3D3DB74A.1000802@fastwebnet.it> <5.1.0.14.0.20020723231904.02108760@pop3.norton.antivirus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020723231904.02108760@pop3.norton.antivirus> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i 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 List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 1446af50-ba83-4a55-8298-807747fa4603 X-Archives-Hash: f8b98adc3ed5f2b19874c97ff14f587c On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 11:31:36PM +0200, Christian Bartl wrote: > I don't think that it would be such a good idea. I think it's an excellent idea. :) > I can only speak for myself: As I love Gentoo, but don't have the > time to test known unstable software I'm sure I would be the first > user who never touches the unstable branch. I think Gentoo would get > the same problems like GNU/Linux or Debian: Everyone waits for it > getting officially stable and testing is has to be done by a few > freaks. I decided to check out Gentoo 3 days ago; and still haven't got my system up running as I want it. This is not a surprise to me, I know gentoo is bleeding edge and frankly I'm delightfully surprised how well it all went. The compilation failures I got is already in bugs.gentoo.org, with fixes or acknowledges from the developers that they're looking into the problem. I found the people on #gentoo extremly helpful and pleasant to deal with, so there really isn't anything to complain about regarding the experience I have with gentoo and its community. Does this mean that I am wiping the desktop I use for workrelated issues (now running Debian/testing) or my servers (Debian/stable) in favour of gentoo? No, and I will not until there are a way for me to be relative sure that after an 'emerge rsync', I still can use the machines. I run Debian/testing on my workstation because I know that the most obvious bugs have been caught in testing, and Debian/stable on my servers since I can't under any circumstances afford any downtime on them. Of course, my laptop used to run Debian/unstable. This was so I could use the latest packages and know what my Debian/testing systems would get in a short amount of time. It is now converted to gentoo for evaluation purposes. > Whoever needs a stable Gentoo now only has to read the mailing-lists > an knows about common problems. No, this is not under any circumstances enough. You couldn't get a stable Debian from only reading the mailing-lists and using the unstable branch. It is impossible to follow a branch that changes every few hours and not run into dependency problems. Especially not when you are compiling the sources for yourself. You are bound to run into a problem noone else has encountered before, because the release hasn't been out long enough for anyone to test it with various configurations. As I see it, the package-masking system is already used today for hiding the most broken packages from the user. I think it would melt in well if that masking system was used for the seperation of unstable/stable branches. That way, a user could decide to have KDE as bleeding edge, but the base system as 'stable'. It would need a lot of thinking of course, but the basis is there. :) Sorry for ranting, //Humming