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 62226139694 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 01:05:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A69E1FC0CA; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 01:05:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-x243.google.com (mail-yw0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::243]) (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 BA9F91FC016 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 01:05:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-x243.google.com with SMTP id s143so7329312ywg.4 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 18:05:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=htEdVBrq1C0K8CfUykTfcLnc6j4nkpiaqAQJU7ctn6s=; b=C1D4BUCqSw1d1t2IYnS0qAibFPRc8Ww1ZQn2Uw7XOLgEryaDR8ocgsg7ncLpA0UOnb JSVUa5MOj/uZLUuHuu7VXZpaV3YuggF9wJxZcFaI6Q0nSgwgn8zTx3MnXh0hrvdJoa4D fZoREtH/oTUDAZWr1eJxoxXUEgK2CguEduiKW1lGse/RV+6DprzEloSSbjBG5RIG9rZV xNr1s12zCVurfOjpialLTH5Uh3NeDe/edT6e7tmGn+CbxPyfN8A1d/mPJmiIBoSCixel CWXgcj0j4DyepO7D7uF45wRhSIPoop8n1xlmoaHJknm0eex73oyKwR2KS16EC4Xq1hCx HMhA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=htEdVBrq1C0K8CfUykTfcLnc6j4nkpiaqAQJU7ctn6s=; b=CzTnf+9Wjs08dHTncvYVRgqLKUs6r26fuzlCck4LDySXioQydFbwU4mg2+ayz3pi8E J4SgeFusDyRHUqyY6ulE5gTHQSgSoTHlnipaR4ymraq9RjUj1oEwYqUy5UL/a0edw/DQ Nc1oXsBsA/LKEttRAgniIfuiJB5y1xfQkpHIpI5EU39fo/Xw1TfW4cHEfrvIWoAMByRs F09QIQNFlv3THW2kTQrVLh7GhPIDIAcsN5gzkfQrC9rurJnFgBveHx3PBKSnRKBk1op1 xtilpI+JR78ayOatz2hy36DQE3tLJhxutxqz6vhp3zl7mFx41zWNVzpnq4Pvx4CWfqWC DyBA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw112xNlZl1xcFpfdgB2EbHsPhyVwjRoSmjtsJI6ak3F3R42J5GcQb jg7MZb/8WRQsoeoON0KnIcNLfQ/ses4F X-Received: by 10.129.98.136 with SMTP id w130mr8504100ywb.284.1501290336297; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 18:05:36 -0700 (PDT) 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 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.129.71.3 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 18:05:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20170724222223.6d359e47@sf> <20170724232244.GT12397@stuge.se> <1931696.H1tAJ0QB7a@porto> From: Rich Freeman Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 21:05:35 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: yrswmg-TH2K4VdqMN3SvqtVTbhI Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts? To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 18a610e5-de63-46dd-bffb-b2cc9a0499bb X-Archives-Hash: 1125a05812307660ad114b76ad27d204 On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Alec Warner wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 3:44 AM, Andreas K. Huettel > wrote: >> >> Am Dienstag, 25. Juli 2017, 01:22:44 CEST schrieb Peter Stuge: >> > >> > I hold a perhaps radical view: I would like to simply remove stable. >> > >> > I continue to feel that maintaining two worlds (stable+unstable) >> > carries with it an unneccessary cost. >> > >> >> That's not feasible. It would kill off any semi-professional or >> professional >> Gentoo use, where a minimum of stability is required. > > > So my argument (for years) has been that this is the right thing all along. > > If people want a stable Gentoo, fork it and maintain it downstream of the > rambunctious rolling distro. > What is the difference between forking the repository, and just maintaining a keyword inside the same repository, besides the former being easier to integrate into QA/etc? People who are interested in working on stable already do so, and people who are not for the most part shouldn't be bothered by it. In the cases where stable has caused issues with maintainers the council has generally dropped arches from stable support so that repoman won't complain when packages are removed. I won't say that having stable costs us nothing, but I think the cost is pretty low. Asking people who want stable to leave isn't going to make things any better. -- Rich