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 1JLjYf-0008Vf-5j for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:27:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 794F3E0328; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 18:27:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from QMTA04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.40]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D90CE0328 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 18:27:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from OMTA04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.35]) by QMTA04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id l38M1Y0090lTkoCA40BL00; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:27:06 +0000 Received: from [67.189.95.250] ([67.189.95.250]) by OMTA04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id l6T91Y00E5Q77KX8Q00000; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:27:11 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=nJOXsBhvf7UA:10 a=XCacg5bD8fuOqfq7BtkA:9 a=-49bsgq7EEK-ewuZ9z0A:7 a=U5_WR8eWQ0NzF0oiDLBvISWPUSwA:4 a=9xyTavCNlvEA:10 a=v47ZLdibA2YA:10 Message-ID: <47A60778.6070001@cesmail.net> Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 10:27:04 -0800 From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071227) 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 To: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-releng] Re: Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta References: <1202013069.18679.1234757825@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1202027865.22956.1234772505@webmail.messagingengine.com> <47A57FF8.7080204@gentoo.org> <99df1af0802030419m662f5605u2b851e32290bbfcc@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 33ea0380-86f1-42cd-a998-dd11be131feb X-Archives-Hash: 751ecb01208254a5fac19b4770032f6b Alex Howells wrote: > On 03/02/2008, Markus Hauschild wrote: >> If you really want to test ~arch packets you don't necessarily need >> ~arch stages to download, you can just switch your Installation to >> ~arch and then file bugs etc. > > .. which may not be received too well. There is a perception that > Developers *support* ~arch, which is a skewed outlook; it's there for > testing, it is *not* meant to be used by 99.5% of end users. It is a > means to an end, a way to track packages which *may* be stable, a QA > process. > > ie: The following would/should be entirely acceptable: > > I'm running ~arch of libfoo and it's breaking appwoo, help! > Need this to work, really *REALLY* badly! > > We're aware of those issues, but libfoo works fine for most > of the other apps which require it. No ETA on the fix, > tough sh*t for running ~arch on a critical box. > > Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh! > > If you're interested in helping that QA process, most of the > architecture teams now have an 'Arch Tester' (AT) setup you could help > out with... Well ... I've been running ~x86 and ~amd64 for a long time and I can't remember an instance where I needed to drop back to stable for the things I regularly use, such as R, maxima, Ruby, Lyx, and I can't remember a time when I needed to drop back to stable for a core component like the kernel, gcc, perl, or python either. But -- that's x86 and amd64 -- it might be much riskier on something less common, like powerpc. -- gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list