From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kzw36-0006y8-5i for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:25:04 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8B9C7E034B; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp-vbr19.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr19.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.39]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7A7E034B for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:24:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from epia.jer-c2.orkz.net (atwork-106.r-212.178.112.atwork.nl [212.178.112.106]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp-vbr19.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mABGOusR092562 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:24:56 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jer@gentoo.org) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:24:50 +0100 From: Jeroen Roovers To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds Message-ID: <20081111172450.04e02b38@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20081110181334.GD7038@aerie.halcy0n.com> <4918D0BC.50202@gentoo.org> <4918DE04.8010207@gentoo.org> <49195BFA.7060404@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.6.1 (GTK+ 2.12.11; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner X-Archives-Salt: f3730a2f-10dd-46db-bc00-343e85f678a4 X-Archives-Hash: 4c88b402595a6fec0a765dfcb0c23fca On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:06:02 +0000 (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote: > If it's a "production, critical, important" system, then what is one=20 > doing installing updates on it directly without verifying them on a=20 > generally identical test system first? Now you're ridiculing the idea of having a "production/ critical/ important" system. Most of our users probably use a single Gentoo machine (I see many cases where users have multiple machines, but only one running Gentoo, or have one machine running several operating systems), and for them an important system is one that they cannot readily replace. Words like "production", "critical" and "important" can be applied as easily to the state of a company's or nation's system as to a single person's. The stable branch has never been about commercial systems and their stringent requirements[1] - it's all about this level of quality that has users up in arms about one package blocking another or one package requiring half the system to be rebuilt at a rate of no more than once a year[2]. Kind regards, jer [1] We've had calls for an =C3=BCber-stable project in the past that would lock down versions and backport patches for enterprise systems. [2] I.e. when we break the promise of [3]. ]3] http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/philosophy.xml