On 28/01/14 11:33 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Here's a proposal that may address concerns from the long "rfc: > revisiting our stabilization policy" thread. > > It seems at least one of the problems is that with old ebuilds being > stable on slow arches but not the more recent ebuilds, it is a > maintenance burden to keep supporting the old ebuilds even on fast > arches where it's still stable. > > Why not allow maintainers to drop redundant stable and even ~arch > keywords from their packages? > > Then these old ebuilds will stay with _only_ slow arch keywords. If they > were working back then, they will continue to work now, since there are > not that many changes to break things as opposed to faster-moving arches. > > What do you think? Please let me know if I should clarify this. > > Paweł >
I thought there was a general consensus that only the latest stable on a given arch is considered actually-stable.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
