From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JLaMO-0002vE-RK for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 08:37:57 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AC90CE05DB; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 08:37:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89258E05DB for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 08:37:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03AD96656E for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 08:37:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: 0.247 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.247 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.432, BAYES_40=-0.185] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ttSbEffhmJlo for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 08:37:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09619665AB for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 08:37:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD2908F634 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 03:37:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from web5.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.214]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 03 Feb 2008 03:37:46 -0500 Received: by web5.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id 7F88950B06; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 03:37:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1202027865.22956.1234772505@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: au4SQ/JeXER+CPcfbiLn+ARfH9QHHoGJJZyhxmJmXzSG 1202027865 From: davecode@nospammail.net To: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface References: <1202013069.18679.1234757825@webmail.messagingengine.com> Subject: [gentoo-releng] Re: Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta In-Reply-To: <1202013069.18679.1234757825@webmail.messagingengine.com> Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 00:37:45 -0800 X-Archives-Salt: 85559bda-f2e6-4da3-8df9-aaebd0e2d9cb X-Archives-Hash: 24eb25f47b84fd66081fad72f250baa7 > we'd never release ~arch tarballs I'm talking testing, you're thinking stable... Testers by definition do not want old stuff. The reason they are testing is they want new stuff. Yes, they understand the risk. In Debian they use "unstable" and "experimental" branches. Some big distros even vector off "unstable," such as Ubunutu. So I am not alone in this... The rolling stage3 suggestion isn't that Gentoo checks everything. The servers just spit them out. The idea is that Gentoo give testers more recent ~stage3's than year-old tarballs which are not even marked ~arch. No SVN/CVS etc. Our explicit interest is testing - not stable releases! Even when you ship 2008.0 we'll be on ~arch. Having just gone through days of testing with 2007.0, and upgrading to ~ppc, I'm just trying to offer some constructive feedback. Linux projects want testers and developers, in general. The way to attract testers is lowering barriers to entry. > I think your idea of how Gentoo releases work is a bit skewed. > Everything comes from stable. Always. I'm not clear how I said otherwise? Well, okay, straighten me out ... My understanding is * Gentoo has two parallel ongoing branches, arch and ~arch * ~arch has more recent packages than arch but less stability * both branches keep upgrading over time with bug/security/feature fixes * the only stage3 tarballs that exist are for the previous mega public release * Gentoo releng team plants a pole in the ground and ~arch becomes arch "beta" * arch "beta" quickly turns into arch-stable, while a new ~arch forks ahead Corrections welcome...Anyway, rolling testing tarballs for ~arch was the idea. Rolling tarballs for both arch and ~arch together is no more work than one or the other. It would be the same automated stuff. Thanks for a wonderful distro and the work on 2008.0. --=20 =20=20 davecode@nospammail.net --=20 http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different=85 -- gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list