* Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
@ 2014-01-16 19:59 99% ` Peter Stuge
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Peter Stuge @ 2014-01-16 19:59 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
Rich Freeman wrote:
> I get what you're saying, though there is still a cost to leaving the
> bug open to years. In this case it means an old package stays in the
> tree marked as stable. That either costs maintainers the effort to
> keep it work, or they don't bother to keep in working in which case
> users get saddled with issues.
Since it's not possible to force anyone to keep old packages working
when the rest of a system has been upgraded this is hard to solve.
If reality is that a package is in the tree but there is no stable
version which works in an otherwise updated system then I think it's
accurate to have an open bug.
If nobody makes the package work then there seem to be two options;
either leave the bug open until someone makes things work again,
or to remove the package from portage and close the bug as WONTFIX.
But even if a given package is removed from portage the old stable
version is still installed on the user's system.
//Peter
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-01-14 21:37 [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy William Hubbs
2014-01-14 23:49 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-01-15 11:40 ` Sergey Popov
2014-01-15 17:04 ` Tom Wijsman
2014-01-16 6:20 ` Sergey Popov
2014-01-16 15:54 ` Peter Stuge
2014-01-16 17:56 ` Rich Freeman
2014-01-16 18:11 ` Peter Stuge
2014-01-16 18:42 ` Rich Freeman
2014-01-16 19:59 99% ` Peter Stuge
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox