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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-41583-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1OSwOQ-0005UO-2r
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:15:46 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C3030E0D1D;
Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:15:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.webfaction.com (mail6.webfaction.com [74.55.86.74])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7714E0CED
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:15:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181])
by smtp.webfaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A458392ECA
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:15:34 -0500 (CDT)
Received: by wyg36 with SMTP id 36so862499wyg.40
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
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
Received: by 10.216.85.85 with SMTP id t63mr7233562wee.86.1277662532452; Sun,
27 Jun 2010 11:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.184.130 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20100627171644.GA1414@Mystical>
References: <20100627150445.GA19456@Eternity>
<AANLkTimm1TIJaCiLc_DoCXzR8o4aNbN043oblPwNj9l8@mail.gmail.com>
<20100627171644.GA1414@Mystical>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 20:15:32 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTikQb8eEHSSl6phrTInPSVuQNcSrhBnNjWMM3MNo@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy for late/slow stabilizations
From: Auke Booij <auke@tulcod.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: f824e507-e04c-4e01-9004-67c5f5a4e370
X-Archives-Hash: 52ba33837a7debc992a291caf3a92135
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> What? I am talking about exotic arches and I didn't say to drop to
> entire stable tree. Just to shrink it in order to keep it up to date
> more easily
But my question stands: what really is the advantage of having a
stable tree, when you could better invest your time in keeping the
testing tree up to date and working? Most production systems are
running x86, right? Are stable versions of minority architecture
installations really that much more stable than testing versions?
PS: this is by no means a rhetorical question.
PPS: bonus points for the person who can tell me a good opposite of
"rhetorical".