[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Some packages have new releases more than once a month and sometimes it's reasonable to not skip stabilization of any version. Given version of a package is usually no longer tested by users after release of a newer version, so I suggest the following change to the policy of stabilizations: Stabilization of given version of a package can be requested if this version has been in the tree for at least 10 days and a newer version of this package has been added to the tree. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 17:36 +0100, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: Some packages have new releases more than once a month and sometimes it's reasonable to not skip stabilization of any version. Given version of a package is usually no longer tested by users after release of a newer version, so I suggest the following change to the policy of stabilizations: Stabilization of given version of a package can be requested if this version has been in the tree for at least 10 days and a newer version of this package has been added to the tree. I am not aware of there being a 30 day policy, and have always considered it as a guideline, not policy. If the maintainer sees that 10 days is good for the package sometimes, I see no problem with it. Arch teams might kindly request explanations of why the quicker stabilization, but I don't represent any myself, but in case of quicker stabilization of package I maintain myself I try to state in the STABLEREQ bug why the quicker stabilization. Is it stated in any documentation that 30 days is a policy? -- Mart Raudsepp Gentoo Developer Mail: l...@gentoo.org Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Mart Raudsepp wrote: Is it stated in any documentation that 30 days is a policy? Not that I'm aware of - it is a guideline as you indicate. However, don't expect anybody to actually take action on a STABLEREQ if there isn't some kind of rationale for going stable so quickly. The whole point of stable is that they provide some sanity to the release process - if upstream releases a new version every other week then perhaps we should either: 1. Question whether it should go stable at all. 2. Pick a version once in a while and target it for stabilization, backporting fixes as needed. We don't need to be Debian stable, but if the only reason for stabilizing a package is that upstream has already moved on, then I think we're making a mistake. In fact, if upstream abandoned a release after only two weeks that would be a good reason NOT to stabilize it. End users can always run ~arch if they need to - at least this way they know in advance what they're getting into.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations
Richard Freeman wrote: Mart Raudsepp wrote: Is it stated in any documentation that 30 days is a policy? Not that I'm aware of - it is a guideline as you indicate. However, don't expect anybody to actually take action on a STABLEREQ if there isn't some kind of rationale for going stable so quickly. Yes it's a guideline that you should follow unless you can give reasons to deviate. The whole point of stable is that they provide some sanity to the release process - if upstream releases a new version every other week then perhaps we should either: 1. Question whether it should go stable at all. 2. Pick a version once in a while and target it for stabilization, backporting fixes as needed. Yeah one can question if adding every release is really important for users. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
