From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-64344-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7600138247
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:11:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 54AC4E0A9A;
	Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:11:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65F75E0A89
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:11:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-68-49-223-78.hsd1.md.comcast.net [68.49.223.78])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: mjo)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49EA133F5B2
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:11:26 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <52D5E03C.3010900@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:11:24 -0500
From: Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
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: revisiting our stabilization policy
References: <20140114213719.GA2684@laptop.home>	<52D5B2CA.5030407@gentoo.org>	<20140114223312.GA3337@laptop.home>	<52D5BDAD.4030808@gentoo.org>	<20140114231113.GA3393@laptop.home>	<52D5DAB6.1000609@gentoo.org> <20140115020802.700b1568@TOMWIJ-GENTOO>
In-Reply-To: <20140115020802.700b1568@TOMWIJ-GENTOO>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 40321518-4184-46e5-988f-b629c5309914
X-Archives-Hash: a0cf657660a6fc6f5e080d09a58c19e8

On 01/14/2014 08:08 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> 
> This is under the assumption that the user knows of the state of the
> stabilization worsening; if the user is unaware of that change, the
> "could have done anyway" might be less common and first something bad
> would need to happen before they realize the worsened stabilization.
> 

If I don't realize it, it ain't broke.