th stable (Re: gimp 2.8.0 rc1, gimp plugins)

[Bartosz Świątek]

W dniu 20 kwietnia 2012 22:26 użytkownik Artur Wroblewski
<wrobell at pld-linux.org> napisał:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Caleb Maclennan <caleb at pld-linux.org> wrote:
>>> well... if you need more stable line, then why not to create one with
>>> appropriate
>>> branch in CVS? of course, the problem is that somebody needs to maintain that,
>>> which I believe is full time job and lack of resources causes the stable branch
>>> to freeze. therefore, imho, it is not good idea to link CVS HEAD with stable
>>> line - and that was the result of similar discussions in the past if i
>>> reckon well.
>>>
>>> if you need more reassurance, then what about introducing TH-STABLE tag and
>>> sending packages to builders only when they are tagged with above?
>>
>> A tag scheme like that could of course work. Again I would ask ask
>> how, other than different tag names, this is different from the status
>> quo.
>
> it is very simple. "th-stable", "ac-stable" or whatever... provide
> meaningful, self documenting names to things.
>
> you want to discuss strategy on CVS HEAD, then... well... you have
> few things to consider

I really really am confused now. You're pretending your side of the
story is how it's always been done in PLD. It's really not. HEAD was
always reserved for stable package releases.

>
> - in the past Ra or Ac could be on CVS HEAD, which one it should be back then?

Now Th is on HEAD, rolling development, doesn't mean on HEAD can be
anything. Try to understand, there're some people here who actually
care if the OS that they use is stable.

> - now it could be Th... but why not Ti?

It is. Th is on HEAD and that's a fact. Why not Ti? Because Ti is now
TLD and totally separated from PLD (thanks to one individual who
couldn't stand sharing ep09 with Ti, even though it's not his
machine).

> - what about future if some other distro lines happen?

Unofficial distro lines were always banished to other branches.

>
> again, meaningful tag names do not cause above problems.

So, what causes your problem with using DEVEL for your unstable Gimp
release? You seem to think that everyone else needs good arguments to
keep the things like they are now. The fact is that you need good
reasoning to put unstable releases on a branch considered stable.



-- 
"I'm living proof if you do one thing right in your career, you can
coast for a long time. A LOOOOONG time." -Guy Kawasaki