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 1OSxyP-0003N1-Lw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:57:01 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6CB23E0E9B; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:57:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f53.google.com (mail-bw0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ECA8E0E38 for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:56:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz6 with SMTP id 6so309642bwz.40 for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:56:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:date:from:to:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=zxi54ClCSE1kO1/Hv+Fdyk7GphR/l3rzPO3zH80VyXE=; b=NIrJp2kQzvxLUwfQ181RYvq202AFsMFq1oXwROyM2s1VgIwoONy9lLcaoT5Clqkooi gZqBQi2+Pmq9yOK3EWBmrXlgM7unv+Mgdmp/JrWrAFnrCFzJldXbAbuzFjAnMJqVUzbw ShxEv5nYPne0DrgKyzRXHT7J3wr/8CguGxnoQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=c9leOWt/WlJF34/6UN6uCCL7P6asJQieMBOZQ3DmcpdseVMvlMN+LIOwBdbWR3Ty6U HrsnGp7//uH2eibV7UPqnuJxREPvzaXWK/njh4HdeYJVB5QnADXB+AzQ0J0QasYpRBsB 2eHhcIX5zDcH7cq7EV9e5h7vA7V3/IW0MUCYo= Received: by 10.204.83.221 with SMTP id g29mr2736296bkl.124.1277668615629; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:56:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Mystical (79.103.24.94.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr [79.103.24.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u13sm15039474bkz.6.2010.06.27.12.56.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:56:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Markos Chandras Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 22:58:33 +0300 From: Markos Chandras To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations Message-ID: <20100627195833.GB2125@Mystical> References: <20100627150445.GA19456@Eternity> <20100627171644.GA1414@Mystical> 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; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: e60807ef-bf8e-4710-8c7b-8ad4dd415b3b X-Archives-Hash: 9f5b01b2f27c5debfc5d026dd563f920 --rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 08:15:32PM +0200, Auke Booij wrote: > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Markos Chandras wr= ote: > > What? I am talking about exotic arches and I didn't say to drop to > > entire stable tree. Just to shrink it in order to keep it up to date > > more easily > But my question stands: what really is the advantage of having a > stable tree, when you could better invest your time in keeping the > testing tree up to date and working? Most production systems are > running x86, right? Are stable versions of minority architecture > installations really that much more stable than testing versions? Because a stable tree it is supposed to work. Testing tree on the other hand is vulnerable to breakages from time to time. We can't always ensure a working testing tree. We are people not machines. We tend to brake things and this is way we have the testing branch.=20 --=20 Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org --rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkwnrWkACgkQ9/cejkQaxBBpowCfcLkTiBtOJrcCzV5kXcAMgS4m HskAnAjzUV9zrFS8m0gJgD5FNPcqTt8v =80NB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm--