On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Tom Wijsman <[email protected]> wrote:
> While I don't, and asked it just because of the large amount; it
> appears from some things lately, and not just OpenRC, that there is a
> certain group that regards ~arch as some kind of new stable.

People have been talking about that for years.  I think that years ago
there were some issues with stable breaking when ~arch did not, but
those are largely behind us.  Then there were situations like it
taking FOREVER to get openrc into stable.

I just don't see any drivers to stay away from stable now.  ~arch is
also a lot more stable than it used to be, so more are likely to run
it.  However, I don't think that is a reason that we should be timid
about breaking things there (within reason).

>
> Let me dig up an example...
>
> Our last sys-kernel/gentoo-sources stabilization was 3 months ago:

I don't really see a problem with stable package being all of 3 months
old.  Contrast that with youtube-dl which pull from ~arch and rebuild
about 3x/week.

If somebody needs a newer kernel they can run it.  I needed something
so I accepted <3.10, and it looks like I'll either have to accept
<3.11 now or just live with 3.9 until stable catches up.  I don't
really see a problem with either unless I'm looking to fix some
particular bug.

Rich

Reply via email to