Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:05:19 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: on the subject of changes to -RELEASEs... Message-ID: <199704070735.RAA05938@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199704070643.XAA25872@freefall.freebsd.org> from Darren Reed at "Apr 7, 97 04:38:09 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Darren Reed stands accused of saying: > > I've noticed some commits recently for RELENG_2_2 and as other have > commented, this changes (totally) a set of files for 2.2.1. No, it changes files for 2.2-stable. 2.2.1 is history; you are watching the normal progression towards the next 2.2.x release. > Can we have some sort of policy implemented so that revisions are > `automatically' made every 2 weeks (say0 if there have been any changes, > and each week, as part of the weekly update scripts, produce a list of > diffs from the last release in one file. You can add a few 'nice ideas' to that thought (put me on a mailing list for these, add checksums, give us some ID numbers for these diffs), and you come up with CTM, which has been in operation for years. > something like "cvs diff -r LATEST_2_2 src > ~ftp/freebsd/patch.level > > that's got to be another nicety with linux. you can update the kernel, you > don't need to configure sup/cvsup, etc. Yeah, right. Don't get me started there 8) Just to observe that having a set of diffs against "something" is nothing compared to having a local copy of the entire CVS repository for the subsystem in question. And configuring CVSup is _simple_ and _painless_ and it is the greatest joy of any software I have ever met in regard to source tracking. If you are having problems with it, my numbers are below. JDP is quick and helpful with questions. CVSup works and that's all there really is to it. > it begs the question: if we're changing 2.2 after 2.2-RELEASE is made, > what does 2.2-RELEASE mean if my 2.2-RELEASE is different to yours ? 2.2-RELEASE is a constant. You are confusing a RELEASE (a frozen moment in time) with the dual development points (3.0-CURRENT and 2.2-STABLE). Sites that want to run 2.2 and are interested in keeping up with stability/security-related updates should use either CTM or CVSup to track the RELENG_2_2 tag, which will give them the 2.2-STABLE sources. > Should all FreeBSD just be a series of SNAPSHOTs ? No. In the ideal world, people would _test_ stuff before it's marked RELEASE. This is currently our biggest problem, whether it's because the users think that we should do all their testing for them (stupid, lazy, gutless, greedy) or that we never make mistakes (complacent, possibly stupid). I mentioned enlightened self-interest before. If someone needs an explanation of this in the particular context of RELEASE testing, feel free to ask. Be prepared to detail at length your contributions to the project, or I will refrain from being gentle. 8/ > darren -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704070735.RAA05938>