-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/13/2012 12:48 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > > But there is one big ass but. We have some packages that were > stabilised last time few year back and they provide multiple testing > versions on top of that. > Who is the one to deterimine which one should go stable and which to get rid of? > We had some humble tryouts to create automatic stabilisation request > which didn't turn out exactly well as most of the maintainers had to > actually do more work ;-) It is always up to the maintainer/herd as to when a package goes stable. But to keep ebuilds for ex. gcc around for over 5 years is just insane. Keep packages around that have been replaced with a newer package is just insane. Yes the newer package has to move to stable first, but we should be cleaning the tree up to only support what we really and truly are gonna support. Do we really want to try and use gcc-2.95 to build kernel-3.7? I highly doubt it would even work. > > > > Long story short for to have some sane policy wrt amounts of the > stable packages. Testing packages can't be handled easily by some rule > because the development differs everywhere. > Packages should provide only one stable version per branch/slot by default. > Exception for this rule are base-system packages where requirement is > to provide two stable versions at any given time. > > Well there are exceptions to every rule, it is the ideal to get a discussion to make a better decision as to when a revision of a package should be removed and no longer supported. Well many slots can be useful for many packages, there has to be a time we start removing them older slots that just are not practical any longer. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQyiWcAAoJEKDMw7q00Ii0yyAIAJqgILtFzx8VSm8ULXP4vEgv eEUu6eOO30QUnTb7aR8mYfY62PFPyKSOX6+Juvwo+HlMnJlCA256qopGuwY9zXeq h7tWf3dzbkZTNwLAiVgCeifxGvcBwyqQKcbk4NuY4S1eYAV3USkNncZ6t2FANx96 eCw9rN/ZAbj6qp8PRE8/e+dSi5tx3JW3/WUZzpdTFE0PGDm7qIPTRgLhsn89cPy1 619cwqhzG4+VQanyWnXf6FPoo6fhDWGMirXQe+5TV7M8wpXx7nS/QpiaONIxLn9W /I+aVQXEVld1dWrw44YGhZX3kdBlnm5ceyOGm+9dXTkXxYL1OVmU5b8VAYP0sOo= =ceAZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
