Divorce the 3 tiers [was Re: My resignation]
zhouhui at wam.umd.edu
Tue Jul 13 13:06:11 PDT 2004
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 09:26:39PM +0200, Matthias B. wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:32:42 -0400 Hui Zhou <zhouhui at wam.umd.edu> wrote:
>> How about divorcing the 3-tiers (which was in my mind all along)?
>I thought about this, too, and I think it would be a good idea. This would
>be a development model more like that of Mozilla/Firefox. They share the
>same repository, they share most of the code and fixes/changes may be
>merged in the one or other direction, but Mozilla is not meant to become
>Firefox at some time or vice versa.
>In the LFS case, committers for unstable would be a superset of committers
>for testing which would be a superset of committers for stable.
I even believe we should destroy this superset structures. The
different branch in LFS has intrisic conflicts in policy and
interests. It's quite difficult for a committer to commit in one
branch without the influence of the other branch. For example, the one
supports belfs gets annoyed on any accusation of including certain
packages nomatter it is being accused on the unstable branch or the
testing branch. And the one who supports discussion will accuse the
inclusion of certain packages no matter it is included in the unstable
branch or the testing branch. And they argued and hurt feelings.
The things are they should not be conflict. There are developers like
certain packages in, and there are developers do not; more
importantly, there are audience/users who like to see certain
developments directions, and there are users would like to see the
other. So make it seperate and both the developers and users will be
It's just seperate in committers. They are still equal in mailinglist
discussions but different people will the final say on different
More information about the lfs-dev