On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Peter Stuge <pe...@stuge.se> wrote: > > I hold a perhaps radical view: I would like to simply remove stable. > > I continue to feel that maintaining two worlds (stable+unstable) > carries with it an unneccessary cost. >
The question is whether devs would start being more conservative with ~arch if it essentially turned into the new stable? If ~arch doesn't break then we're probably delaying updates too much. If it does start breaking and we don't have any alternative, we'll probably start losing users who just can't deal with their systems breaking. Personally I'd rather see stable stick around. If it isn't updated often that isn't a big deal (to me at least). -- Rich
