[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: today's merges
From: |
Andrew Suffield |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: today's merges |
Date: |
Mon, 1 Sep 2003 10:12:52 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 01:17:36AM -0700, Robert Anderson wrote:
> > > Indeed! For our MICO project development no star-merge is simply
> > > show-stopper. Is really 1.1 so unstable or buggy?
> >
> > Not buggy, per se, just unstable in the classic sense of the word -
> > it's a target that moves _really_ fast. I don't have time to chase
> > it.
>
> Then don't. Just pick a good one, like 1.1pre5.
To do that, I would need either:
a) a solid upstream committment to support it in the future - ie,
fixing significant bugs that arise in it
or:
b) enough time to backport the fixes myself
I don't have either right now.
I have to consider things like "If I have to pick one of these, which
would I rather be running for the next two years?".
> > You're better off running from the daily builds if you need that
> > sort of stuff.
>
> Sure, but most people don't do that, so they're left wondering how arch
> solves the "repeated merge problem" like it advertises.
I think you'll find the set of users who want to solve this problem is
fairly small.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
pgpwXT1fuVh74.pgp
Description: PGP signature