From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 27 14:41:33 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6AA116A41C for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 14:41:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A41543D1D for ; Fri, 27 May 2005 14:41:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j4REhO3C049780; Fri, 27 May 2005 08:43:24 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <4297316B.3060801@samsco.org> Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 08:40:43 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050218 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francisco Reyes References: <3248.172.16.0.199.1116876092.squirrel@172.16.0.1> <42937D06.1070309@samsco.org> <20050526235805.N5798@zoraida.natserv.net> <42969D28.6070306@samsco.org> <20050527102221.X12475@zoraida.natserv.net> In-Reply-To: <20050527102221.X12475@zoraida.natserv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: Mike Jakubik , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Lifetime of FreeBSD branches X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:41:34 -0000 Francisco Reyes wrote: > On Thu, 26 May 2005, Scott Long wrote: > >>> Is the goal to have a new major branch every 2 years? >> >> >> Yes. This will allow us to pace our major development projects much >> better than we have in the past. > > > Someone mentioned 5.X will be supported till 2007 (or at least that's > the plan). So will, in average, branches be supported 2 years after a > new one takes over? Yes, that is the usual policy of the security team. There will likely be other developers that push changes into the 5.x stream for some time to come. > > Sounds like a good strategy for most shops. I can imagine that for a big > shop with lots of machines it may be a bit agressive, but I am not one > of them. :-).. besides big shops likely have developed entire systems > around how to deploy the OS to many machines. Yeah, and what I'm trying to do is smooth the bumps for the long term. The 4.x->5.x transition was simply a gigantic mess for users, and it was largely a function of it being 4+ years in the making. Scott