<div dir="ltr"><div>True there are plenty such distros, but keep in mind that for all the other major packaging systems users have the option of rolling or static.<br><br></div><div>For aptitude based distros there's rolling and static options, for RPM based distros there is... but for pacman-based distros there's only Frugalware, which I tried a while back and it and it's forked pacman are a mess. Look at one of their 'FrugalBuild' files:<br>
<a href="http://git.frugalware.org/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=frugalware-stable.git;a=blob;f=source/xfce4/libexo/FrugalBuild;h=eb8dba3c4f1b395b17d65d00fdd63b70a5f77e10;hb=HEAD">http://git.frugalware.org/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=frugalware-stable.git;a=blob;f=source/xfce4/libexo/FrugalBuild;h=eb8dba3c4f1b395b17d65d00fdd63b70a5f77e10;hb=HEAD</a><br>
<br></div><div>They took the elegance and simplicity of Arch's packaging system and tried to supplement it with huge, complex scripts. It certainly isn't something I consider an option.<br><br></div><div>Anyways my point is there's a niche remaining in the 'market' - pacman based static distro.<br>
<br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:35 PM, Petko Ditchev <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pditchev@gmail.com" target="_blank">pditchev@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Just my 2 cents - I think there are
enough 'freeze' distros out there . That's what's unique about
Manjaro - that it's faster pace , but still one notch below Arch ,
so there's the added stability . I'd be happy to see the project
expand , but the frozen-distro user-base has a lot of fully
developed fully focused competitors for it.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Petko</font></span><div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On 11/07/2013 08:28 AM, Philip Müller wrote:<br>
</div></div></div><div><div class="h5">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>This is possible and we already have
some ideas regarding this topic. Actually Roland is working on
such a thing with a different prospective. This will mean a
different concept as we have it now. Also lots of testing. When
we have some we can inform you. Might also want to look at
frugalware, which basically does this concept you're talking
about.<br>
<br>
Rolling releases have some downs but we try to fix them. We
already slowed it down a little but most of the people need or
like the current speed.<br>
I think adding a longer testing period in testing might help to
get it much more stable. Maybe you point me to the edges on our
current concept and what you miss right now.<br>
<br>
On 11/07/2013 01:25 AM, Rob wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Heyas,<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>What do you all think of the concept of a Manjaro
'static' (or i guess we could loosely use the term
'LTS'), non-rolling branch?<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>It would give users an option where update woes
are only a possibility once or twice a year, instead
of the potential for regular issues that comes with
rolling. (The forums seem to be proving my point
more and more every week.)<br>
<br>
I realise if such a thing were to be implemented
within the Manjaro infrastructure it means like 66%
more space needed on every mirror (based on a
2-branch model).<br>
</div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>FYI I'm kinda-sorta-probably planning to do it
even if you guys aren't interested ;p<br>
<a href="http://www.paradoxcomputers.com.au/icebound.txt" target="_blank">http://www.paradoxcomputers.com.au/icebound.txt</a></div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
So, is there any interest in running such a thing within
Manjaro infrastructure?<br>
<br>
If you're interested, I'm willing to commit a lot of my
time to it. I'm willing to pretty much oversee the whole
branch if desired, including doing all the initial testing
at update times myself, etc.<br>
<br>
However, If it were to happen, I'd greatly prefer all
updates added to the repo be checked/approved by 2 people,
so I would need to find one other person with plenty of
packaging experience (and general Linux knowledge) to
commit to it and be the second set of eyes signing off on
package updates with me.<br>
<br>
</div>
Regards,<br>
</div>
Rob.<br>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
manjaro-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:manjaro-dev@manjaro.org">manjaro-dev@manjaro.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.manjaro.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/manjaro-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.manjaro.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/manjaro-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>