From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 127C2139694 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:41:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 505EA1FC131; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:41:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F411E1FC11C for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:41:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from x2 (unknown [133.11.143.190]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: heroxbd) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6BBEA3418C2 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:41:09 +0000 (UTC) From: Benda Xu To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts? References: <20170724222223.6d359e47@sf> <20170724232244.GT12397@stuge.se> <1931696.H1tAJ0QB7a@porto> <20170731002830.GA14487@dt001651.civica.com.au> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:40:55 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20170731002830.GA14487@dt001651.civica.com.au> (Sam Jorna's message of "Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:28:31 +1000") Message-ID: <87h8xto2ug.fsf@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: f7fa45f3-57a4-4428-bf99-3243ffc95c7e X-Archives-Hash: e1e1d520d145da14d2cd1fdf7abdca53 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Hi, Sam Jorna writes: > Wouldn't it make more sense to make Gentoo *more* attractive to run in > corporate environments, rather than simply saying "We're not RHEL so why > bother"? > > People do use Gentoo in production environments, both personally and > professionally, even if it is those that have more investment in doing > so than the average IT Joe. By removing stable, we would be reducing the > potential arguments for the few who do want to use Gentoo in that sort > of environment. We would be becoming more of a niche distro. > > "Hey, lets try Gentoo - it's really configurable." > "What's their stable policy? How often does it break?" > "Stable? What's that?" I agree with Sam. I see several cases in academia (mainly astrophysics and particle physics) that Gentoo stable is used and performs well. Professtional use of Gentoo should be actively supported and even advocated. Benda --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEENTS8ZhMowhj4Iw2H33YQtSHxcSIFAll+fJgACgkQ33YQtSHx cSLBdA/+OiNVHNFntYFy4+RxELANxymVtCI7TcZ1Kd8lsoL5JV/vvTpPIhBGqiMS KifF5x4ipRd9KGdS/xE4H3o/TE2xd6OBDycjQ8Ue6KmVwcnybbh5tp+ch2H7Yijz x4Fx59kaWoWD1N9Qvr07W9jc2ba6V3OHGktc+Y+Spo93EE9HeZNG9Lf55rPOXiXL 8CZYYMwmvJEiBUlAkz6bIlHQMaBYTzH192qKsqn3dQzXrJ7wQWRPtL+lGdaGlCwF JwOKwrITVT7w2XvPaCkQNFm+VErUYFAwGyyD9y2N1yvC4vwjFJ09G8Z2JMzIMl/h URUxeRGZcPNy+AHmw8KID30llDAZ40roMIF4Bc3QqYIij9qTKfQ1iga8/vi5HG61 ZyGFDfkGYcK7ZlJVDz5yX8XN0EveaBGKaKxzlagwVjdY4sS1GnRE48xMD2Ql0Uxl kLyr1yseFnzEJDjPY2a3gkE6j1s5VhQlOOEIUDeyUeifdKj0WKRAsvgGy+2RkE7s ktz5z6b3ZuIqIw6z3yIQbl2RzLMQlMvujd1TxaDfLTl/sxuS/jfHAUvkm59G4vI1 TmsVF/H/oTmc0eYMqrsEsavGt9kevoi0L/6HMTL4erjgyf0P190zNnOooHs0/fQh 9vQ9bB7aLL3XZwYndhMVfl3ooOnC21wfGSuSTp239VDP1BmsZEQ= =Cy9e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--