From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C7891381F3 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 18:39:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 73233E0B45; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 18:38:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-f177.google.com (mail-vc0-f177.google.com [209.85.220.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D27DE0B10 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 18:38:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id gf12so371798vcb.36 for ; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=nzGWxgjddRM/Ht45Svb/MWisfV93D0axg7RLP93ROYI=; b=ah1ofGC24GS3dAwSkyTZxEKOhaPlYHAS7SXjgoldegY3/shPN849OaHa9d5uUebwDc KcC7ttw+VJMS+pGj9JSM6XWaTbbVp41TfKD8QqGOsSWksBio6M57YF+p0W7Al3s/TK2t mVCHegCUtYQfpwsCdS1zo+LGSDGqbfaVP3dhvzeOxC6Up6gFMYOa4hcQ3vmh0x8lxwUR OhQx1qfXvbvIOQyj1Dqxigu8XXhaDnPtynxT8LFi3cRzMgec+iq19DA8LtREn73WJvQk ducGF3PREL8i9VUQRnk2i6++kEjzX06RBuzxy5TZ5SvzqBoZ7TgmizES/NmgIsevlf/U XRTg== 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 X-Received: by 10.58.46.196 with SMTP id x4mr3893076vem.73.1375987135805; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: alon.barlev@gmail.com Received: by 10.58.255.193 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 11:38:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130808202627.4b474471@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> References: <5202416C.5@gentoo.org> <1375881254.7753.41.camel@rook> <5202DD20.8050906@gentoo.org> <5203A880.1050306@gentoo.org> <5203B190.80306@gentoo.org> <20130808172340.7d2424af@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <5203C908.1000304@gentoo.org> <20130808185357.4208db83@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130808202627.4b474471@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 21:38:55 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: NsGNG1y-resCPmkVvAZmo5H4vW4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gnome Stabilization 3.6 or 3.8 From: Alon Bar-Lev To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: f1c8655b-7510-4fca-9735-8bad6e453c7f X-Archives-Hash: 3da7abc6707b730ec9b0aa7e0b4768d8 On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 20:57:15 +0300 > Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> > Stability is about the quality of the ebuilds and the user >> > experience in general. It is not a statement that all Gentoo >> > developers think that the package is useful. Many would say that >> > nobody should be using MySQL/MariaDB for production work, but that >> > has nothing to do with its stability as a package either. >> >> This is not entirely correct. >> >> If from now on, a bug with systemd of new version of a package blocks >> that package stabilization, it means that all developers must support >> systemd. > > This is not entirely correct either. > > Not necessarily, one can opt to mask this combination and stabilize > this combination later by removing the mask; it's an implementation > detail, but certainly there's no need to imply that they must. > > Another example is that when you add a package to the tree, you are not > required to initially commit both an OpenRC unit and systemd service > file; you are suggested to provide them for the convenience of the > user, if you don't know systemd service files then you aren't obligated > to support them as far as I am aware of. There are people that can help > you in supporting them as well as following up on their bugs; and if > you wonder, the ebuild change to support a systemd service is trivial. 1. There is huge difference between adding a new package that lacks feature and maintaining existing features. 2. When people say that something is trivial, my immediate reaction is fear. systemd is far from being trivial, but let's don't get into that one again. > >> So having systemd stable is a decision that should be made by >> the entire community, and have huge overhead on us all. > > systemd is already stable, it has not found to be an huge overhead; > whether it should have been a decision made by the entire community, I > doubt it, it neither seems to show any problematic wide spread problems. > >> So apart of the politic message, there are implications of maintenance >> efforts, stabilization efforts. > > Agreed; though, they are quite small and shouldn't be a bother. It's > worth doing these small implications to provide choice to our users... > >> I appreciate the discussion at debian, it is not wise to support [I am >> adding: at stable] more than one solution for layout. > > Can you share the link? I'm yet to see good reasoning why it's not wise. Latest[1], you can search for "debian openrc" for more. [1] http://www.marshut.com/rnvrp/survey-answers-part-3-systemd-is-not-portable-and-what-this-means-for-our-ports.html > -- > With kind regards, > > Tom Wijsman (TomWij) > Gentoo Developer > > E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org > GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D > GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D