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 1N4gvV-0006zM-FQ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 20:21:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 66B22E0931; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 20:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from petteriraty.eu (host.petteriraty.eu [188.40.80.83]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39631E0931 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 20:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.130.46.226] (qob2.kyla.fi [82.130.46.226]) by petteriraty.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B74A29B15 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2009 20:21:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4AEDEDBE.9030107@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:21:18 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?UGV0dGVyaSBSw6R0eQ==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; fi; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090916 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 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> <4AEDD13B.7070204@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4AEDD13B.7070204@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 OpenPGP: url=http://users.tkk.fi/~praty/public.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig812A7831B55C93CBE41A02D0" X-Archives-Salt: 238b108c-8649-4433-850a-30b502dced60 X-Archives-Hash: fd26c42d3d29020c8ee8806bd002d7c9 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig812A7831B55C93CBE41A02D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Richard Freeman wrote: > Mart Raudsepp wrote: >> >> Is it stated in any documentation that 30 days is a policy? >> >=20 > 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. >=20 Yes it's a guideline that you should follow unless you can give reasons to deviate. > > 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: >=20 > 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. >=20 Yeah one can question if adding every release is really important for use= rs. Regards, Petteri --------------enig812A7831B55C93CBE41A02D0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkrt7cEACgkQcxLzpIGCsLSvvgCfRXFPxKMeC3+zX0wBSynfA3s9 Oj0An2oBaAxt2nDwMBTip7F226veNp30 =Ke54 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig812A7831B55C93CBE41A02D0--