On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 18:12:52 -0500 Denis Dupeyron wrote: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Sergei Trofimovich <sly...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > > TL;DR;TL;DR: > > > [...] > > Here's a data point you may, or may not, find relevant. in 16 years of > using Gentoo exclusively, the only one time I used stable on one machine > for about 2 years it ended up being much more of a pain than unstable. > Actually, I can't say I have anything to complain about unstable. On my > critical machines I snapshot the system subvolume before I update. I can't > remember the last time I had to roll back.
+1 I do not use stable, even in production. Too few packages, too old versions, too long time to stabilize newer versions. I'm just OK with ~arch. > I'm sure most will disagree with me but since you're indirectly asking for > my opinion here it is: I think people working on stable are wasting their > time. But who am I to stop them... I support stable in my packages, but mostly because I have to. One of the real benefits from the stable for me is stabilization process which sometimes uncovers otherwise undetected problems. Of course there are people who use stable, I respect their opinion; they have different use cases, practices, experience. So I'm not asking to abandon stable, just explaining that for me and my cases it is mostly useless. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko
pgprrqrPZspmA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
