Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations

[Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1055 bytes --]

On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 06:43:30PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> 
> Which is the decision to make: make things very difficult for minority
> arch users, who get screwed over royally every time keywords are
> dropped, or make things slightly more inconvenient for developers, who
> have to keep some things around for longer. It's all down to whether
> you think happy users are more important than happy developers.
> 
> -- 
> Ciaran McCreesh

Please explain me why keeping foobar-1.0 ( Released in 10/12/2009 ) is
in favor of a ppc64 stable user when amd64/x86 has foobar-2.1.3 (
Released 60 days ago ) already stabled for them

What if a foobar-1.0 bug pops up? What kind of support will that user
get from the gentoo or upstream maintainer. The most frequent answer
would be "Please update to 2.1.3. 1.0 is 0ld". Yes, not droppping the
keywords is convenient for users but in this case their stable tree gets
obsolet and unsupported

-- 
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]