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 2E8D713832E for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2016 15:37:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7D4D21C051; Fri, 5 Aug 2016 15:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AFB921C04D for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2016 15:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [100.42.103.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: williamh) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C6778340AA7 for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2016 15:37:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 10:36:58 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2016-08-14 Message-ID: <20160805153658.GA11058@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: <2e11e445-c25b-b7f2-def1-99aed92308b6@gentoo.org> <20160804162443.GA7048@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <20160804231224.7b7462168f1d23e88fe4135c@gentoo.org> <20160804222234.GA8357@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <20160805022658.GA15727@linux1> <20160805142859.GA19008@linux1> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Archives-Salt: 47ac1f1a-edc2-4adb-b53f-183415e40569 X-Archives-Hash: fcfce4801a94fb96869572cb246db18a --ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 10:36:41AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 10:28 AM, William Hubbs wrot= e: > > > > Besides our maintainers keeping old packages around, we are doing a > > disservice to our stable users by offering them old software instead of > > keeping them as current as possible. > > >=20 > No argument, but if you actually asked stable users I'm not convinced > that they'd prefer less-tested recent packages over well-tested older > ones. Anything to get things fresher is good, but there probably > needs to be some kind of sanity check. To clarify what I said earlier, if you are running full ~, there is no way you can easily test your packages against the stable tree, so you shouldn't be stabilizing anything, no matter which arch you are using. To stabilize packages, you should be running a mostly stable system other than the packages you maintain. William --ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlekspUACgkQblQW9DDEZTj2+QCgnKoIuHc3MjfppSgtZUfXsOSB t/EAoJ5L3XqmQ/jOdZwFUPZfolLTxF38 =9YDs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ew6BAiZeqk4r7MaW--