Wine has since the 1.0 release a stable and an unstable branch. The stable branch is the branch that can productively be used, for example by companies as wine promises it will have no regressions. The unstable branch is for everybody, who wants bleeding edge and run the latest games. It would make sense, if you just stabilized releases of the stable branch. Anything else is likely to lead to bad surprises. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
Frankly, wine-1.1 branch is lightyears ahead of where 1.0 branch stays in both functionality and stability. Do you really want to exclude gentoo stable users of this? It is still possible to mask locally if 1.1.x fails for you, but I don't think there are many non-obscure apps that will be affected that way.
of course 1.1.x is ahead of 1.0.x and of course run more programs with 1.1.x But it still has regressions. If you have a program that runs with wine-1.0.1 it will also run with 1.0.2, but if it runs with 1.1.20 it might not run with 1.1.21. If you want the latest wine, you unmask it anyway. If you don't, all your programs already run with it and you want them to run after any upgrade.
that's life with wine
I reopened the bug because I like you to reconsider this for the wine-1.2.x series. I think this is important, because unlike other packages, upgrading wine can render whole applications useless, and it already has in the past. The guys at wine introduced the stable series for a good reason. At Gentoo, no one can possibly test wine enough, at wine they can't either but they are getting a lot closer. There are many people that use some working set of windows applications with wine and they don't want to have it broken. Other distributions do it like this. At wine they know better what's stable and what's not. It's not my intention to annoy anyone with my own, personal preferences, I think this will be better for most users. Those that want an unstable wine, can get it by unmasking, as it should be.
i'm not touching any version already in the tree
