On 01/23/2014 3:48 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: >> I think that you're probably right about the added problems of >> attempting to keep a stable @system. Other stable architecture teams >> aren't really able to keep up and I'm not convinced that we should >> try. > > Given the limited manpower and hardware we have, I would say it is very > hard to dedicate a box for testing a stable @system. If someone wants to > take over this role, then fine by me, but we need to make sure he will > be around and do this for as long as it takes. > > Personally, I am happy the way things are at the moment and fixing > ~arch should be our priority
Aye, sticking with ~arch is still the best right now. Perhaps soon, we can look at @system going stable once ~arch is nailed down. It's a bit of a slippery slope when you go stable, because the number of packages that users want to see stabilized usually goes up, not down. Especially once you start supporting *anything* under X11. -- Joshua Kinard Gentoo/MIPS [email protected] 4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28 "The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." --Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
