From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Jun 21 0:17:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from magnesium.net (toxic.magnesium.net [207.154.84.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3B4C237BDC6 for ; Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:17:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jasone@magnesium.net) Received: (qmail 91947 invoked by uid 1142); 21 Jun 2000 07:17:21 -0000 Date: 21 Jun 2000 00:17:21 -0700 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:10:50 -0700 From: Jason Evans To: Warner Losh Cc: The Hermit Hacker , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP discussion moving to freebsd-smp Message-ID: <20000621001050.E233@blitz.canonware.com> References: <200006202311.RAA75680@harmony.village.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <200006202311.RAA75680@harmony.village.org>; from imp@village.org on Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 05:11:37PM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 05:11:37PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > In message The Hermit Hacker writes: > : Which one would be harder to merge back into -current from a branch? Your > : NEWCARD work or the SMP work? Why not make a branch for NEWCARD and when > : the SMP work is declared stable, *you* spend the effort of merging it back > : in? > > I would do that if the SMP stuff is really bad. I think that Matt's > assuances indicate this won't be the case. > > However, it isn't just NEWCARD. It is every other project that is > going on in -current right now. There's work on the usb stack, in the > sound system, in the config system, etc. Should all of them run on a > branch? No. They shouldn't. If the SMP folks were to have done what > was implied in the original message, I think we'd all get together and > create a branch for real work. > > Having said that, I think that the SMP folks now understand the > importance of keeping the really bad breakage down to a few days and > keeping the base of the system somewhat stable. I don't think a > branch will be necessary unless the SMP folks aren't able to do what > they say they are going to do. This is in my opinion a bit revisionist, but part of the blame falls on me for not clarifying "destabilization" adequately. -current will continue to compile for the most part, and may even work okay most of the time. However, there are a couple of transitions we will have to make that will cause massive instability for periods of as much as a week or two as we smash all the major problems. This is not anything too far out of the ordinary with regard to -current, which is meant for development. The difference is that we expect this periods of instability to be unavoidable. We'll push through them as quickly as possible, but things will be a bit iffy at times. Jason To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message