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

[Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1291 bytes --]

On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 07:37:39PM +0100, Tony Chainsaw Vroon wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 18:04 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > As many of you have already noticed, there are some arches that are quite
> > slow on stabilizations. This leads to deprecated stabilizations e.g a
> > package is stabilized after 60 days which makes that version of
> > the specific package obsolete and not worth to stabilize anymore.
> 
> So you would suggest to be like Ubuntu and say "we can not be bothered
> to support any minority architectures anymore". This effectively
> disbands all architecture teams except AMD64 and X86; it should be
> subject to the same scrutiny (I suggest a council vote) as a GLEP or
> EAPI change.
> Personally I would like to hear stronger reasons then "it inconveniences
> me when a bug I file is open longer then a month" to destroy the current
> diversity of supported architectures (be it PowerPC or a prefix
> installation on OS X).
> 
> Regards,
> Tony V.

Oh come on. I never said to stop supporting those arches. I just said to
shrink their stable tree. What do you suggest? Pretend to have active
exotic arches just to look shiny and pretty?

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

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