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 DEECD1384B4 for ; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:55:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3EAD521C044; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:55:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 537B421C03E for ; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:55:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1a0Wyr-0003vf-QM for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 16:55:10 +0100 Received: from ppp118-209-103-73.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net ([118.209.103.73]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 16:55:09 +0100 Received: from kensington by ppp118-209-103-73.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 16:55:09 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Michael Palimaka Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 6 portage is out! Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 02:54:58 +1100 Message-ID: References: <20151117230934.15218644.mgorny@gentoo.org> <564BAE1D.5090103@gentoo.org> <564BCE9E.6050403@gentoo.org> <564BE0CB.3030509@gentoo.org> <22092.10244.685936.324131@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <564C4403.40302@gentoo.org> <22092.23414.863950.329173@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <564C5D05.4080805@gentoo.org> <20151121215121.b2e4a29f30ca2baa71d493ef@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp118-209-103-73.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: <20151121215121.b2e4a29f30ca2baa71d493ef@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: f28ecf6b-4f2c-4697-9529-89af44975896 X-Archives-Hash: ee56026c225b63bb548b55614ffcfb43 On 22/11/15 05:51, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:01:21 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: >>> When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of >>> Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll leave the >>> details as an exercise for the Gentoo developer. >>> >> >> People who run ~arch are not really end-users - they're contributors >> who have volunteered to test packages. > > I strongly disagree with you. We do not use stable even at > enterprise grade production systems and HPC setups. Stable is just > too freaking old in order to be usable for our purposes, not to > mention that it lacks many packages at all. We tried stable > several times, it just freaks out admins (including myself) too > badly or results in horrible mess of stable and unstable which is > less stable that unstable setups. I do not use stable at > workstations and personal setups as well. > > Nevertheless I consider stable useful as stabilization process > gives more testing for packages (and some fixes are forward ported > to unstable versions). Of course I understand that there are people > using it and I try to support stable packages as well, but these > versions are mostly a burden and I can't really understand stable > users. Is the state of stable really that bad? I see this sentiment a lot. I run mostly-stable systems and rarely have an issue with old/missing packages (but I'm involved in the maintenance of many of the packages I use so I try to keep on top of stable requests). Are there particular areas that are lagging particularly, or is it just in general?