Phillip Berry wrote: > Hi Sune, > > Thankyou for the answer, after a quick search it is indeed the "GLEP 19" > that > satisfied my query. I also found the answer to my other question: > > "All ebuilds should remain in the tree for a minimum of one year. This allows > users to upgrade as infrequently as once per year without risking the stable > portage tree leaving them behind without an upgrade path." > > It's truly unfortunate that that particular effort has lost momentum. > > Could i trouble you to point me to some more specific discourse regarding the > stable portage tree? I wish i could offer my help but I'm afraid i don't have > enough of an understanding of the depths of Portage to be of any great use...
Well, the problem right now is what kind of a route do we want to take? For example, if Gentoo wanted to try and maintain an enterprise ready solution to the stable tree issue, I don't think we could do it. On the other hand, if we wanted to establish a few tools/solutions that provide some enterprise ready functionality, I think we may be able to do that. Some ideas I had was just starting small. Bring back the server page on w.g.o and start adding documents on how to manage Gentoo servers in an enterprise setting. It'd probably be tied to the docs team in some fashion. Right now, there are a couple of docs on how to setup specific applications, but none really about server administration. I know for a fact that I do things in a specific way to maintain the infra servers without breakage. I'd like to find time and make a doc about that. Next, come out with a plan or goals we would like to achieve. Stabilizing the tree isn't an easy task. Sure, we could use the snapshots used for 2005.1, etc, but maintainence and QA are the biggest problem. Dealing with security updates for example is one issue. Do we tackle the problem by doing backport patches, or do we just version bump, or do we offer both? Parts of that are more for a third party entity to try and resolve because of the resources we'd need. Seeing a mini fork of Gentoo for the enterprise is one path I see happening down the road. Reason being, specific things would need to be changed to make Gentoo *really* enterprise ready, such things that would disrupt the current Gentoo's development. I would not want to see such things happening and hindering what we already are good at. Its almost like the Ubuntu project, but not funded by a billionaire :). Anyways, ways to get this rolling again? Start combining/creating documentation to help server admins out there to manage Gentoo better. Come up with a set of goals/projects for us to attain and prioritize them. Start getting folks to work on them. In the past, most of us either got busy with other projects or real life issues, or the folks we had just kind of disappeared. I'm planning on getting this rolling again, but things always come up. Also, folks always come up with 10 different ways to solve the same problem. We'll never come up with something that makes everyone happy. Anyways, I'd love to hear your feedback and opinions! -- Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc> Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
