From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65DBD138247 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:06:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5E497E0A6C; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:05:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jacques.telenet-ops.be (jacques.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.50]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A609E09DB for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:05:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by jacques.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id E05s1n00C2khLEN0J05sJx; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:05:52 +0100 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:04:56 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: mjo@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Message-ID: <20140115010456.07953224@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <52D5B2CA.5030407@gentoo.org> References: <20140114213719.GA2684@laptop.home> <52D5B2CA.5030407@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/_=T7JnfgibutrpJvnmCEl5M"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: bf862ecf-a6ae-448b-9aaa-01f0e766af94 X-Archives-Hash: f907b1a0178b2ed1f016a6d5644d3ded --Sig_/_=T7JnfgibutrpJvnmCEl5M Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:57:30 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/14/2014 04:37 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > >=20 > > 2. I would like to see the policy below applied to all arch's [2]. >=20 > [ ] Yup > [X] Nope For which reason? I could do [=E2=9C=93] Yup [X] Nope 'cause a stable version that's no longer stable (due to found bugs) shouldn't remain, otherwise it is falsely shown to the users as being stable; whereas it could very well be old, insecure and buggy instead. Together with a news message, users could appreciate this. --=20 With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --Sig_/_=T7JnfgibutrpJvnmCEl5M Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS1dCoAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9P9YIAJOzgWH/BGOEhnhq4/q7olv/ YPQ0gX3pN/N01tILnDUb9/X1X0ihVk5NwVhbMAMsnClvuMPkjAHGpX60X6ywKs+A l8p4wQCJgz4Y13F2/vdKREM1jAoVjLbLB8wiSCvk5EtvQQma1WaBujMfPYqTOPuG BHm31oxhtAVe8ljWitXb3uAHQbEeqdHe4/YLGWjlskVhuRCkeAtYiWLMopYbeh5e kjT/Ina7/ZICtFfVd5NY9MHeaBAVF6EPkGZH5xsZ3kxQAQnX17uHnf6ShBWAXdFZ fDwB8NJ/P4IoKRqFAM+ADTN1+bivxI9kCRq2drq8BtC2D2cZijFjNmF79v6IJCU= =jgTS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/_=T7JnfgibutrpJvnmCEl5M--