From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from bigglesworth.mail.be.easynet.net (bigglesworth.mail.be.easynet.net [212.100.160.67]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 402352494D for ; Tue, 25 Dec 2001 14:40:07 -0600 (CST) Received: from 213-193-176-135.adsl.easynet.be ([213.193.176.135] helo=theleaf.be) by bigglesworth.mail.be.easynet.net with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 16IyMi-0008Uv-00 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Tue, 25 Dec 2001 21:40:00 +0100 Message-ID: <3C28E425.6000903@theleaf.be> Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 21:40:05 +0100 From: Geert Bevin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.7) Gecko/20011221 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuilds for kde3 beta etc. References: <0GOR009629L95F@mxout2.netvision.net.il> <3C26E6FB.6010600@theleaf.be> <1009242742.1501.0.camel@zoidberg> <0GOV00D81VGO1H@mxout1.netvision.net.il> <20011224231121.A6926@chiba.3jane.net> <1009282203.1648.4.camel@zoidberg> <20011225094918.D6926@chiba.3jane.net> <1009311584.8850.0.camel@zoidberg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developer discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 03194766-8d17-4971-8ea6-106c94d51b20 X-Archives-Hash: 58bb42e1d383d3a3ae09610c1519dc5e > The ebuilds in /incoming are untested and should not be used by users. > But since it's available to users, users use it anyway. > > I think it all comes down to what kind of distribution we want to > create. If we want to make a distribution for those that create it and > use-at-own-risk for everyone else (this is all fine by me) we should > clearly state this (to users and developers). Personally I think that since we're steering towards v1.0, stability and clarity for the regular user should be an important issue. People tend to ignore warnings or disclaimers and go ahead anyway. Then when it doesn't work they either get a bad image of the distribution or they ask questions on the mailinglist or irc channel about the stuff that was essentially unsupported, taking up valuable developer's time and patience. I really think that they shouldn't get the opportunity to get access to those ebuilds unless it's clearly distributed seperately as a complete alpha (or beta) branch. Just my idea on the topic. > If we want to create a distributions for everyone we have to go around > to make users don't hurt themeselfs. Since users _will_ do bad things to > there own systems if they are able to. And if so, masking and comments > are not enough, imho. I agree with that. > CVS branches solves these problems (and we have to start using branches > sooner or later anyway, preferable when we release 1.0). > > Regards, > Mikael Hallendal -- Geert Bevin the Leaf sprl/bvba "Use what you need" Pierre Theunisstraat 1/47 http://www.theleaf.be 1030 Brussels gbevin@theleaf.be Tel & Fax +32 2 241 19 98