From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 24 11:00:40 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A596106564A; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 11:00:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 501488FC0C; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 11:00:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04BAF46B49; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 07:00:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 12:00:39 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Alexander Motin In-Reply-To: <4DB40026.5030405@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: References: <201104240858.p3O8wwqT024628@svn.freebsd.org> <77FE817D-D548-4B79-A64B-C890D94323B9@FreeBSD.org> <4DB40026.5030405@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r220982 - in head: . sys/amd64/conf sys/arm/conf sys/conf sys/i386/conf sys/ia64/conf sys/mips/conf sys/mips/malta sys/pc98/conf sys/powerpc/conf sys/sparc64/conf sys/sun4v/conf X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 11:00:40 -0000 On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Alexander Motin wrote: >> Are you going to address that on updating magic will make it work within >> the next 2-4 weeks? > > s/ad[0-9]+/ada0/ should fit 90%. A bit more sophisticated script should fit > most. In what place should I put that magic? > >> If you will not then thanks for screwing 50% of our users and please back >> this out again. > > Reverting is not an option. _Constructive_ propositions are welcome. Hi Mav: It is the policy of this project that the release engineering team has final authority over what ships in a release. It is entirely within scope to revert this change for 9.0 if issues with the upgrade path are not addressed. My hope also that this path can be entirely avoided through a rapid addressing of upgrade path issues that have been known (and discussed on the mailing lists extensively) since you posted about the work on the public mailing lists. I agree with Bjoern that it is critical to address these issues in a timely manner -- our users depend on reliable and easy upgrades, and it seems (on face value) that significant work remains to be done to make that possible. Our release is increasingly close, and it's important we keep the tree as stable as possible so that merges of other straggling features can go uneventfully. Robert