On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 09:22:08 +0200 Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Second, I believe a lot of the value in our stable tree comes *just* > from the requirement that stabilization is only requested after 30 > days without major bugs/changes in the unstable tree. Assuming there > are enough users of a package on unstable, that means important bugs > can be shaken out before a version hits stable. This could mean that > potentially, even if we inverted our entire model to say we > "automatically" stabilize after a 30-day period without major bugs, > we hit most of the value of the stable tree with again drastically > reduced pain/work. I’m a stable user when I can be. I use Gentoo for the configurability, not for instant access to the newest versions of things. I think this is a fairly reasonable proposal if stabilization is otherwise happening too slowly right now. If 30 days with no bugs plus an automated successful build against an otherwise-stable set of dependencies led to an automatic stabilization, I’d be fine with that. Some clarification would be needed on what bugs block stabilization, and of course there would need to be a flag that maintainers could add to specific ebuilds to indicate whether or not they’re stabilization candidates (though I wonder if it would be better to flag the ones that *aren’t* candidates, rather than the ones that *are*). -- Christopher Head
pgpnLOp9yoUTL.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
