From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N4hme-0000q2-BU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 21:16:20 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 49C45E0976; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 21:16:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21546E0976 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 21:16:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C089666F16 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 21:16:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.996 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.996 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.397, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uWpMoZdZJPRB for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 21:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C3465ACB for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 21:16:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N4hmP-0006pY-Ot for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:16:06 +0100 Received: from 64-201-202-141.regn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca ([64.201.202.141]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:16:05 +0100 Received: from dirtyepic by 64-201-202-141.regn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:16:05 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Ryan Hill Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 15:16:48 -0600 Message-ID: <20091101151648.1d4f836a@gentoo.org> References: <200911011736.38401.Arfrever@gentoo.org> 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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/Fp3zbrLdrRS/oD1vO+W1qx1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 64-201-202-141.regn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.18.3; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 91a64327-c3b2-40ca-82e6-30274815907c X-Archives-Hash: 80dca95ead75b103d8f697df608d1be4 --Sig_/Fp3zbrLdrRS/oD1vO+W1qx1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 17:36:30 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > Some packages have new releases more than once a month and sometimes it's= reasonable > to not skip stabilization of any version. Given version of a package is u= sually no > longer tested by users after release of a newer version, so I suggest the= following > change to the policy of stabilizations: > Stabilization of given version of a package can be requested if this vers= ion has been > in the tree for at least 10 days and a newer version of this package has = been added > to the tree. I thought the arch teams were already overworked. Why do you need every la= st version stable? --=20 fonts, Character is what you are in the dark. gcc-porting, wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 --Sig_/Fp3zbrLdrRS/oD1vO+W1qx1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkrt+sAACgkQiqiDRvmkBmJqaACfQL1P6kSYDAlg8B7AfvBS6xn0 lJwAoLWXf5hObcTigKVh2+PmurLqrQs3 =VOx6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Fp3zbrLdrRS/oD1vO+W1qx1--