Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 18:06:45 +1030 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposed code merge, objections? Message-ID: <199712140736.SAA05671@word.smith.net.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 14 Dec 1997 06:53:01 BST." <199712140553.GAA01161@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > I've been told there is no official policy on this, so I want some > > > feedback. I am considering currently a merge of the alog driver > > > (Industrial Computer Source AIO8-P) into -stable. > > > > -stable is not meant to accumulate new features from -current. Unless > > there are strong reasons, new drivers should not migrate there. This > > _is_ official policy. Particularly in the case of Jamil's driver, which is unlikely to be particularly useful to anyone other than Jamil as anything other than a sample. > So to put things differently, what is the policy to move features > from -current to -stable ? Unfortunately we don't have a port > category for kernel enhancements, maybe we should add one. If a feature is nonintrusive and subject to popular demand, migration after a vetting period in -current is worth considering. Also bear in mind that often things would make it back to -stable if there was someone that was a) using the feature and b) had the time and resources (eg. a -stable system) to do the backport with. mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712140736.SAA05671>