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 1ICPIV-0001rt-O8 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:27:44 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l6M0QkEK015771; Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:26:46 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 l6M0Osb8013498 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:24:55 GMT Received: from [192.168.0.100] (ip72-220-190-134.sd.sd.cox.net [72.220.190.134]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 170B665153 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:24:54 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <46A2A3DC.3020706@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:25:00 -0700 From: Josh Saddler User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070627) 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] baselayout-2 stablisation plans References: <1185028563.2490.22.camel@uberpc.marples.name> <46A23108.5030006@gentoo.org> <1185035193.2490.25.camel@uberpc.marples.name> <46A25508.6020009@gentoo.org> <1185044944.2490.44.camel@uberpc.marples.name> In-Reply-To: <1185044944.2490.44.camel@uberpc.marples.name> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig8096DD61B0C00C01F7F897B2" X-Archives-Salt: 6ea6aaeb-d130-4753-b413-ae57c6fac296 X-Archives-Hash: 8750f41b2599cf5284499c2b97f85622 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig8096DD61B0C00C01F7F897B2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Roy Marples wrote: > On Sat, 2007-07-21 at 11:48 -0700, Josh Saddler wrote: >> (GDP): you give us the info, we'll document it for you. Or I will at l= east. >=20 > Well, the changes are as outlined in my first email. > The user changes are mainly a few variables in the /etc/conf.d/* files > that baselayout ships. For example a few have been removed and a few > have been added, and a few have changed. Yeah, I planned on doing some heavy reading of the new stuff, but I hope I can get you all alone (heh heh heh) for awhile to go over questions that will surely pop up. In case things like new networking configs aren't intuitive, or whatever. >> 3) How long will 1.x be kept stable? (This affects how long the old >> instructions are in the handbooks etc.) >=20 > Good question. We normally keep at least one major revision prior to th= e > current stable in the tree. They can stay in the tree indefinitely I > suppose, but the GDP should only follow the current stable. Maybe > archive the handbook? Archiving the handbook isn't possible. The only thing we archive for historical purposes are the networkless handbooks, in /doc/en/handbook/2006.0/, 2006.1/, etc. I'm thinking that if baselayout-2 is the way of the future, then as soon as it's stabled for all arches (see below for a bit more) then we should pretty much just document that exclusively in all handbooks & docs. That's where a migration guide will be so crucial. Since the thing can't be slotted, and it's a forced upgrade (short of masking, but BAH to those users that do it), I don't think we need to document two completely different systems if they're both stable. >> 5) Do you have a rough estimate (month, 3 weeks, 5 weeks, what?) on wh= en >> the first arches might be stabilizing 2.x? >=20 > No. > If the RC's prove stable and no serious regressions are reported for a > month then we'll probably release a final 2.0.0 and get arch teams to > mark stable a week later, or right away if no last minute changes have > been made. What'd really be nice is if it goes stable for all arches (or at least all of the ones that matter, subjectively) either in time or after the next release. Otherwise, there's going to be some more complications from users who install from media containing old baselayout-1.x and have to deal with the new 2.x right away. I guess we'll see. /me pokes wolf31o2. ;) > Most of the documentation should still apply. I've tried to be as > compatible as possible - the one possible exception being networking as= > baselayout-1 used bash arrays extensively. But we still support that > if /bin/sh is bash, which it is by default for Gentoo/Linux Yeah. Though I still don't know the whole story, I anticipate that updating the networking configs will be the biggest headache. --------------enig8096DD61B0C00C01F7F897B2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGoqPf5aFMlhMsVyURAis9AKCVvONXnkh6JSYi5in6ppQQkdKd5QCcD1ao +dmf4lGgYaak86mOWofWDw0= =oJRK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig8096DD61B0C00C01F7F897B2-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list