Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 19, reloaded (again)

[Dylan Carlson <absinthe@gentoo.org>]

On Sunday 08 August 2004 2:51 pm, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> So, at this point, I'm suggesting three changes to the GLEP:
>
> 1) specify annual updates for the stable tree
> 2) replacing the stable keywording stuff with stable profiling stuff
> 3) adding a separate rsync module for the stable portage tree (or one
> for each release of the stable portage tree)
>
> With that, comments/suggestions are welcome.  Please keep in mind that
> this is a very focused GLEP designed to provide a stable tree and
> predictable expiration of ebuilds to our users.  It is not intended to
> propose other far-reaching changes to Gentoo Linux.
>

Most of that sounds good to me, particularly the profiling.   Godspeed.

However, if we propose using a different tree, repo or branch tags for 
enterprise, I'm not a big fan of that approach.  IMO it should be taken 
incrementally; that is, get it to work in the existing tree w/ new 
profiles, and if there is some implementation problem getting enterprise 
to co-exist with everything else, move it out.  

The only other reason I can see justifying a new tree/repo/branch would be 
if the enterprise team itself was a totally separate organization of 
developers for certification reasons.  One developer flipping between two 
trees both for the sake of Gentoo is duplicating a lot of effort.

Cheers,
Dylan Carlson [absinthe@gentoo.org]
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x708E165F

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list