[arch] Arch release policy - extra repo

[Christian Schmidt]

On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 12:31:06PM +0200, Peter Feuerer wrote:
> > One single question: why? Arch is meant to be rolling-release-distro. It
> > is not intended to "stick with a release". The releases are just there
> > to make the installation easier. If you want to stick with a release,
> > you most likeley chose the wrong distribution.
> > 
> > Christian // mucknert
> 
> I think it would not be much effort, and you'll give the users the
> choice of sticking to a release or not. So the question is, why not? The
> only reason I see to not doing this is because of the diskspace this
> "additional" packages need.
> And if the releases are just there for easier installations, why do you
> still keep older releases?
> 
> --peter

You don't seem to understand. "Sticking" to a release means a lot more
than just keeping old packages. What do you think why Distributions like
Ubuntu, SuSE, RH and suchlike spend so much time on? QA, of course.
Sticking to a release needs, if done the right way, infrastructure and a
lot of manpower. If one just keeps old packages, a shitload of problems
will emerge. Think of unfixed security-issues and the likes. If you want
to volunteer for QA, go for it. In the meantime, I don't think that this
will happen in Arch.

Developers Comments are appreciated.

-- 
My Public GnuPG-Key: http://craphouse.ath.cx/~christian/pub/gpg/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch/attachments/20070406/4cca2dc7/attachment-0002.bin