Re: [gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

[nado]

January 11, 2018 9:52 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."  wrote:

> On 11/01/2018 08:43, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> 
>> I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation)
>> was the case:
>> 
>> stable -> development -> experimental
>> 
>> For this reason, e.g. Prefix profiles are (still) experimental, which
>> means they really shouldn't bother non-Prefix people. Prefix users and
>> developers work on an environment where those profiles are promoted to
>> development ones, such that repoman kicks in for their work. (At least
>> that was the idea.)
>> 
>> I see you (re-)define dev as "developer's playground", and I wonder if
>> in that case it wouldn't be better to introduce a new one instead?
>> 
>> Maybe I'm just one of a few who thinks the order is reversed now.
> 
> The stable -> dev -> exp order also feels more natural to me.
> 
> I don't have a strong opinion on this though.
> 
> Paweł

I got the impression that it was indeed
stable -> development -> experimental

with dev as in development, it seemed logical to put it between stable and 
experimental.
But now that I read these comments I wonder if it wasnt supposed to be called 
'developers'
and then the other way round makes sense too.

--
Corentin “Nado” Pazdera

Re: [gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 11 stycznia 2018 08:43:32 CET, Fabian Groffen  
napisał(a):
>On 07-01-2018 21:25:28 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
>> I'd like to follow this with a more precise proposal. Namely,
>redefine
>> the current profile statuses to apply the following:
>> 
>> a. stable -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are errors,
>> 
>> b. exp -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are warnings,
>> 
>> c. dev -> developer's playground, not tested.
>
>I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation)
>was the case:
>
>stable -> development -> experimental
>
>For this reason, e.g. Prefix profiles are (still) experimental, which
>means they really shouldn't bother non-Prefix people.  Prefix users and
>developers work on an environment where those profiles are promoted to
>development ones, such that repoman kicks in for their work.  (At least
>that was the idea.)
>
>I see you (re-)define dev as "developer's playground", and I wonder if
>in that case it wouldn't be better to introduce a new one instead?
>
>Maybe I'm just one of a few who thinks the order is reversed now.

Ulrich has pointed out good enough proof that the ordering should be as you 
say, so I'll correct my proposal.

>
>Thanks,
>Fabian


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny (by phone)

Re: [gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

[Paweł Hajdan , Jr .]

On 11/01/2018 08:43, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation)
> was the case:
> 
> stable -> development -> experimental
> 
> For this reason, e.g. Prefix profiles are (still) experimental, which
> means they really shouldn't bother non-Prefix people.  Prefix users and
> developers work on an environment where those profiles are promoted to
> development ones, such that repoman kicks in for their work.  (At least
> that was the idea.)
> 
> I see you (re-)define dev as "developer's playground", and I wonder if
> in that case it wouldn't be better to introduce a new one instead?
> 
> Maybe I'm just one of a few who thinks the order is reversed now.

The stable -> dev -> exp order also feels more natural to me.

I don't have a strong opinion on this though.

Paweł

[gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

[Fabian Groffen]

On 07-01-2018 21:25:28 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> I'd like to follow this with a more precise proposal. Namely, redefine
> the current profile statuses to apply the following:
> 
> a. stable -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are errors,
> 
> b. exp -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are warnings,
> 
> c. dev -> developer's playground, not tested.

I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation)
was the case:

stable -> development -> experimental

For this reason, e.g. Prefix profiles are (still) experimental, which
means they really shouldn't bother non-Prefix people.  Prefix users and
developers work on an environment where those profiles are promoted to
development ones, such that repoman kicks in for their work.  (At least
that was the idea.)

I see you (re-)define dev as "developer's playground", and I wonder if
in that case it wouldn't be better to introduce a new one instead?

Maybe I'm just one of a few who thinks the order is reversed now.

Thanks,
Fabian

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature