Thus spake Chris Gianelloni on Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 11:28:18AM CDT > *Everything* that isn't in package.mask should be "stable" as far as > functionality is concerned. The testing branch is for testing ebuilds, > not packages. Broken packages shouldn't be in the tree, or should only > be in the tree under package.mask, where it won't affect innocent users > that just want their systems to work.
I thing this misses the meanings of "stable" and "unstable" as I learned them when I ran Debian on just about every box I have. My understanding was that "stable" meant that a package was effectively nailed down to the distribution version and wouldn't change until the distribution version changed, the exception being security fixes. "unstable" meant that a package was subject to change, pursuant to becoming stable with respect to the distribution. "Unstable" didn't mean functionally "broken", just that the package was subject to change. Gentoo's release model is rather different from Debian's, so these terms kind of lose there meaning. By this definition, every Gentoo package is "unstable". -- Lindsay Haisley | "Fighting against human | PGP public key FMP Computer Services | creativity is like | available at 512-259-1190 | trying to eradicate | <http://pubkeys.fmp.com> http://www.fmp.com | dandelions" | | (Pamela Jones) | -- [email protected] mailing list
