From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HjvoD-0007Eg-1d for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 04 May 2007 11:18:45 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l44BHlLO005091; Fri, 4 May 2007 11:17:47 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l44BFotD002832 for ; Fri, 4 May 2007 11:15:51 GMT Received: from [172.28.2.20] (bl5-82-207.dsl.telepac.pt [82.154.82.207]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43FA464148 for ; Fri, 4 May 2007 11:15:48 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <463B15D6.2020109@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 11:15:34 +0000 From: "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070421) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for May References: <20070501093001.9C84D64F39@smtp.gentoo.org> <46370F24.8000600@gentoo.org> <200705021649.32592.vapier@gentoo.org> <20070502220005.70f6e24a@snowflake> <20070503081145.7a775e71@uberpc.marples.name> <4639B651.2030903@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4639B651.2030903@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id l44BHlNL005091 X-Archives-Salt: 5ff796fd-bac9-4c2d-920b-ae5f55b0c5f4 X-Archives-Hash: 1ef137b5c59060d11f3c8583c1f86b83 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi. Jos=E9 Luis Rivero (yoswink) wrote: > Roy Marples wrote: >> >> I maintain and play a game called Eternal Lands. I'm a Council member, >> but not part of the games team/herd. >> >> One of the problems games have with stable/unstable/testing/whatever >> keywords is that upstream changes things that in any other application >> just would not change. For example, the network protocol when talking >> to servers. EL is very version specific and when a new client is >> launched, around once every 6 months they change over right away. That >> means our users need the game right away. >=20 > Thanks for the example, trust me if I tell you that we can understand > the situation pretty well. >=20 >> >> I used to commit EL straight to stable for this very reason, but now >> after a few Gentoo QA people bitched EL will never ever have a stable >> keyword.=20 >=20 > I'm nearly sure that you always (at least) compile and run the new > version in your box before you sent it to stable, didn't you? So, at > least, you are able to say that it works in your case. >=20 >> So instead I periodically have to let our users know how to >> unmask EL just so they can play their game. >=20 > There are always ways to educate users about how to use portage properl= y. >=20 >> So no, in many cases NOT committing straight to stable CAN be >> detrimental to our users if all they want is a games machine. You coul= d >> argue that they shouldn't be using Gentoo, but I would argue why shoul= d >> we discriminate? >> >=20 > Ehm, IMHO call it discriminate is a big hard. Are the gnome-2.18 or > beryl users discriminated or they should be using something different t= o > Gentoo? They only thing people have to do is use some ~arch branch > packages, which isn't too difficult (in Gentoo). >=20 Agreed. All Gentoo beryl users need to use ~arch. I don't think games are so special that we must provide them on stable arch. Afertall, if games are keyworded testing, users can add them to /etc/portage/packaage.keywords if they run a stable system. > This is how I see it: >=20 > Problem with keywording straight to stable is that arch teams are very > zealous about our stable branch. We put a lot of time trying things to > not fail in stable, and if an app is broken, we prefer to not force the > users to compile and install another broken (or unknown to be broken) > version and work to fix the current stable (patches or bumping) togethe= r > with the maintainer. >=20 > But if you send things, that you can't try, to stable, the qa baby jesu= s > will cry if it fails, because nobody has taken care of even compile it > in the arch :) >=20 > Games are not part of core system, so IMHO, use the ~arch branch to hav= e > the latest cool version to enjoy, could be a good way to go for those > el1te gam3rs. >=20 > Thanks. >=20 I also don't agree with having an exception for the games herd. As others have questioned, how are games more important than security bumps? If we were considering exceptions, I would argue that allowing the security team to mark packages as stable would make a lot more sense, imho. Anyway, the important point here for the council meeting is whether our keywording policy is to be enforced or not, regardless of herd, or if / how we want to have exceptions. DISCLAIMER: I have no problems with games. I do like to play some, but I see no problem with using package.keywords. - -- Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo-forums / Userrel / Proctors -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGOxXWcAWygvVEyAIRAgv5AJ9k5N/7Uri+rFCxOZllSp2NwmB67gCfepe3 A1Yj3pwuAI3oo/TODP7N79E=3D =3DUYbe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list