From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 25 06:52:07 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C0E316A4CE
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 06:52:07 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 637D543D49
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 06:52:07 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id DACFA148D7; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 01:52:06 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 01:52:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho
To: Roman Kennke <roman@ontographics.com>
In-Reply-To: <1098686273.666.5.camel@moonlight>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0410250143180.884-100000@pancho>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject: Re: RELEASE_X_Y_Z branches/tags maintained??
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 06:52:07 -0000

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Roman Kennke wrote:

> Am Mo, den 25.10.2004 schrieb Kris Kennaway um 0:30:
> > On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 08:19:36PM +0200, Roman Kennke wrote:
> > > Hello list,
> > > 
> > > I have a question regarding the branches/tags of the ports tree for
> > > stable releases. Are they in any way maintained.
> > 
> > No.
> 
> Hmm, wouldn't this be a good thing to do, especially on production
> machines?

This question comes up once or twice a year.  It is _possible_ that
it would be a good thing to do ... given infinite manpower, which we
don't have.  What we do have is almost 12k ports * 12 build environments
(cross product of major release * chip architecture).

Even with just maintaining one single line of development for ports,
we aren't managing all that coverage, and we aren't making headway
on getting the number of PRs down (we were making slow progress until
the freeze, but we gained 200 during that time.)  We're only getting
somewhere around 95% of the i386 ports, 90% of the amd64 and sparc64
ports, and we are having trouble with the alpha build machines.

Oh yeah, and 3153 ports with no maintainer, which is another problem
altogether :-)

mcl