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 ) id 1RzJYs-0001EM-L3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 03:05:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4185CE0B96; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 03:05:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3167E0B2B for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 03:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkcit16 with SMTP id it16so4787528bkc.40 for ; Sun, 19 Feb 2012 19:04:32 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of freemanrich@gmail.com designates 10.204.131.90 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.204.131.90; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of freemanrich@gmail.com designates 10.204.131.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=freemanrich@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=freemanrich@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.204.131.90]) by 10.204.131.90 with SMTP id w26mr9935053bks.55.1329707072207 (num_hops = 1); Sun, 19 Feb 2012 19:04:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=kTeR0sP1skhQ7B+2dSyExwUkHbqRNh5GdN6LqHss29M=; b=p6GnhoU0r8XHXOTyce02/l4Lv3PMR+ua5TX5Vovp8YyAOsGA2RA+Pq+HfrpPLl/JHH zrRZQ7W4O4dNgqjKYM4FQWDwqYt3Ar0e3qP9Wo00yzC85UUVJToBFiIC9n7n07FWmCXK LZmqwe1QwqlqdaUAZmMtINOzduvL9kETY8bEk= 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 Received: by 10.204.131.90 with SMTP id w26mr8014295bks.55.1329707072124; Sun, 19 Feb 2012 19:04:32 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.205.32.194 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Feb 2012 19:04:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:04:32 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: khkRaf1VXoezPh3DDGNwi8h2tnM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unstabling a package From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: cf5f0b6c-6370-45de-821b-693a9d2f6634 X-Archives-Hash: c3e5e0607257ab7c434eb1161022c8ef On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote: > Any specific procedure to unstable a package? Specifically MythTV. > While there's a lot of user interest in the package, there's just not > enough dev help with the package to really keep it up to snuff to what > could be considered stable. Its woefully behind... The current unstable package for mythtv was the upstream stable version only a few weeks ago. I was contemplating stabilizing it, although with 0.24.2 out it might make more sense to target that version. The current stable version should certainly be removed ASAP - it contains numerous bugs and some QA issues that have been fixed in the unstable version. The only thing the stable version has going for it is support for more plugins. If I get a long weekend I might try upgrading to 0.24.2 and getting that into portage (assuming nobody else beats me to it). Unfortunately my only mythtv system is essentially a production system, so I can't really have it down for any length of time. If we do make mythtv unstable I'd prefer that we not drop versions too quickly. If somebody else is able to keep up with the bleeding-edge versions more power to them, but if the consensus is that the older versions have to go most likely I'd just start maintaining my own overlay and abandon the one in portage. I can really only do a serious version bump maybe 2-3 times per year at most. I'm not convinced that going completely unstable is really going to solve anything, however. I'd rather have a core of stable functionality than something bleeding-edge for something like mythtv. Then again, that might just be personal preference. Rich