> On 19 Oct 2021, at 00:24, Francesco Riosa wrote:
>
> Sorry but portage is too strictly related to the ebuilds in tree, recent
> removal of EAPI=5 from most eclasses underlined that.
> Or to put id differently if you want a LTS portage you also need a certain
> number of "protected"
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 4:25 PM Francesco Riosa wrote:
>
>
> Il giorno mar 5 ott 2021 alle ore 10:31 Michał Górny ha
> scritto:
>>
>> Hi, everyone.
>>
>> I've been thinking about this for some time already, and the recent
>> FILESDIR mess seems to confirm it: I'd like to start a more stable LTS
Il giorno mar 5 ott 2021 alle ore 10:31 Michał Górny ha
scritto:
> Hi, everyone.
>
> I've been thinking about this for some time already, and the recent
> FILESDIR mess seems to confirm it: I'd like to start a more stable LTS
> branch of Portage.
>
> Roughly, the idea is that:
>
> - master
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 1:31 AM Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Hi, everyone.
>
> I've been thinking about this for some time already, and the recent
> FILESDIR mess seems to confirm it: I'd like to start a more stable LTS
> branch of Portage.
>
> Roughly, the idea is that:
>
> - master becomes 3.1.x, and
On Tue, 2021-10-05 at 13:16 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-10-05 at 17:13 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > > 2. What happens to the LTS branch when the next EAPI is released?
> > >
> >
> > I haven't really thought about it. Are you suggesting that we could
> > bump 'master'
On Tue, 2021-10-05 at 17:13 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > 2. What happens to the LTS branch when the next EAPI is released?
> >
>
> I haven't really thought about it. Are you suggesting that we could
> bump 'master' Portage to newer EAPI earlier or...?
>
I just mean that, a priori, the
On Tue, 2021-10-05 at 10:15 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-10-05 at 10:31 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hi, everyone.
> >
> > I've been thinking about this for some time already, and the recent
> > FILESDIR mess seems to confirm it: I'd like to start a more stable LTS
> > branch
On Tue, 2021-10-05 at 10:31 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi, everyone.
>
> I've been thinking about this for some time already, and the recent
> FILESDIR mess seems to confirm it: I'd like to start a more stable LTS
> branch of Portage.
>
I think this is healthy for most software projects, but
In all fairness, there haven't been that much incidents with Portage in
the past under Zac's supervision, isn't it a bit overkill to
bureaucratise the release model just after one incident? It appears to
me that changes to Portage need to be considered very carefully, always,
since it affects
Hi, everyone.
I've been thinking about this for some time already, and the recent
FILESDIR mess seems to confirm it: I'd like to start a more stable LTS
branch of Portage.
Roughly, the idea is that:
- master becomes 3.1.x, and primary development happens there
- 3.0.x becomes the LTS branch
10 matches
Mail list logo
