From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Subject: Re: We need an RFC procedure [Re: Services can now have a default
	value]
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 23:23:23 +0200
Message-ID: <877f18bn78.fsf@elephly.net>
References: <87shl9qo7h.fsf@gnu.org> <877f2go3wn.fsf@zancanaro.id.au>
	<877f2gksbs.fsf@gnu.org> <8737d32abz.fsf@zancanaro.id.au>
	<87bmrr4ghh.fsf@gnu.org> <874lxjnzyx.fsf@zancanaro.id.au>
	<87bmrp8lk6.fsf@gnu.org> <8737d1nxbd.fsf@zancanaro.id.au>
	<20170422004634.4oedqmsebpctjqk4@abyayala>
	<878tmsud8m.fsf@elephly.net>
	<20170422100811.mr3t5rgh6n44xvdk@abyayala>
	<87pog4gihe.fsf@gnu.org> <87wpabsa71.fsf@elephly.net>
	<87bmri7zce.fsf@gnu.org> <20170427183749.2c8b817e@mykolab.ch>
	<87a86vig6d.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41070)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1dCunp-0008Ua-8y
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 May 2017 17:23:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1dCuno-0004U5-Be
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 May 2017 17:23:45 -0400
In-reply-to: <87a86vig6d.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>, Carlo Zancanaro <carlo@zancanaro.id.au>


Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> Petter <petter@mykolab.ch> skribis:
>
>> If I may make a suggestion, coming from a place of ignorance.
>>
>> How about a stable branch that would be opt-in?
>
> What would be stable in the “stable branch”, packages or Guix?  :-)
>
> A branch where Guix itself is stable would be nice, though it would need
> careful merging from master regularly.

This would make sense.  It would require some restraint in moving
packages to different modules or breaking some underlying package
features, which would cause ABI breakage.

I do think it would be possible, though.

> A branch where packages are stable (à la Debian stable) would be too
> much work (I’m even skeptical it makes any sense given that many
> declared and undeclared security vulnerabilities get patched everytime a
> piece of software is released…).

Yeah, that wouldn’t make sense.  It’s hard enough to deal with security
issues in current software in a timely fashion.

--
Ricardo

GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net