From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1005 invoked by uid 1002); 16 Dec 2003 16:13:34 -0600 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 21753 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2003 16:13:33 -0600 From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 23:13:29 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <1070822205.14950.761.camel@lisa.thedoh.com> <200312071415.37606.tradergt@smelser.org> In-Reply-To: <200312071415.37606.tradergt@smelser.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Boundary-02=_KO43/BOd8yTCS/X"; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200312162313.30075.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,PGP_SIGNATURE_2, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, USER_AGENT_KMAIL autolearn=ham version=2.55-uvt6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55-uvt6 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo for production servers. X-Archives-Salt: 462d0620-ef99-4e06-9aea-ae7763d312ed X-Archives-Hash: 153630e81a4c5f54e3487cea42440dbf --Boundary-02=_KO43/BOd8yTCS/X Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday 07 December 2003 21:15, Jeff Smelser wrote: > On Sunday 07 December 2003 12:36 pm, Lisa Seelye wrote: > > Valid enough concern. However if I was building a series of Gentoo > > servers that were to be as stable as could be I would go through the > > portage tree and prune non-server stuff (such as x11-*) and then create > > my own Portage tree to sync against. > > Yes, but can you expect every company to do this? Most don't know gentoo's > in and outs like a dev's probably do. They just want something thats easy > as possible to install, reliable and whatever other "buzz word" you want = to > throw in there.. It is gentoo-enterprise, not gentoo-stable. The thing is that the tree will= =20 not change. That does not in principle say anything about the stability of= =20 the packages themselves. (Although of course we will try to do some QA on=20 them, and fix those that are really broken) Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --Boundary-02=_KO43/BOd8yTCS/X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/34OKbKx5DBjWFdsRAp7CAKCfeP5X+f22TfAaEoO02qjXvXB8NQCfV5Bq yI2aZCvYH1635jdXF9EGmPE= =X57i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_KO43/BOd8yTCS/X--