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 1N4f1y-0002qS-KX for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 18:19:58 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E7768E09CF; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 18:19:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vms173015pub.verizon.net (vms173015pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.15]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6728E09CF for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 18:19:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw.thefreemanclan.net ([96.245.54.62]) by vms173015.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0KSG00HV308S2PFO@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net> for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 12:19:45 -0600 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw.thefreemanclan.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24151175A877 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:19:40 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <4AEDD13B.7070204@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:19:39 -0500 From: Richard Freeman User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091031) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations References: <200911011736.38401.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <1257094529.29790.2.camel@localhost> In-reply-to: <1257094529.29790.2.camel@localhost> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: d9a54b48-ed30-4ce5-8791-2ba8bd785a1e X-Archives-Hash: 2f8b1a7210e21cdfd67202d7f7f12f3b Mart Raudsepp wrote: > > Is it stated in any documentation that 30 days is a policy? > Not that I'm aware of - it is a guideline as you indicate. However, don't expect anybody to actually take action on a STABLEREQ if there isn't some kind of rationale for going stable so quickly. The whole point of stable is that they provide some sanity to the release process - if upstream releases a new version every other week then perhaps we should either: 1. Question whether it should go stable at all. 2. Pick a version once in a while and target it for stabilization, backporting fixes as needed. We don't need to be Debian stable, but if the only reason for stabilizing a package is that upstream has already moved on, then I think we're making a mistake. In fact, if upstream abandoned a release after only two weeks that would be a good reason NOT to stabilize it. End users can always run ~arch if they need to - at least this way they know in advance what they're getting into.