From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6481381F3 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 18:10:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 29A0BE0AC9; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 18:10:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50EE3E0AB5 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 18:10:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.182.101.20] (85-76-106-192-nat.elisa-mobile.fi [85.76.106.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A0C033EB85 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 18:10:42 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5203DEA5.30004@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 21:08:37 +0300 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130802 Thunderbird/17.0.7 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] Gnome Stabilization 3.6 or 3.8 References: <5202416C.5@gentoo.org> <1375881254.7753.41.camel@rook> <5202DD20.8050906@gentoo.org> <5203A880.1050306@gentoo.org> <5203B190.80306@gentoo.org> <20130808172340.7d2424af@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <5203C908.1000304@gentoo.org> <20130808185357.4208db83@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: a12c0b4d-f08c-4007-874e-6d02da353df8 X-Archives-Hash: 9cc231e4724363854ab31b236bba81d7 On 08/08/13 20:57, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> Stability is about the quality of the ebuilds and the user experience >> in general. It is not a statement that all Gentoo developers think >> that the package is useful. Many would say that nobody should be >> using MySQL/MariaDB for production work, but that has nothing to do >> with its stability as a package either. > > This is not entirely correct. > > If from now on, a bug with systemd of new version of a package blocks > that package stabilization, it means that all developers must support > systemd. So having systemd stable is a decision that should be made by > the entire community, and have huge overhead on us all. That's not really true with systemd when the unit files (and related) are in a format that they can be carried also by upstream and can be shared between distributions. They are comparable to logrotate or bash-completion files. You don't necessarily use distcc, ccache, clang, ... and yet you let people compile packages you maintain using them. You don't necessarily use uclibc, yet you allow users to compile the packages against it and expect them to file bugs if something is broken. You don't necessarily use selinux and yet support building against libselinux where possible. You don't necessarily use zsh as your shell and yet let zsh-completion files to be installed when requested. Yet any of the mentioned packages can be stabilized, what makes systemd so special that it can't follow the same rules as other packages? > So apart of the politic message, there are implications of maintenance > efforts, stabilization efforts. Just the normal efforts. > > I appreciate the discussion at debian, it is not wise to support [I am > adding: at stable] more than one solution for layout. > > Regards, > Alon Bar-Lev. >