From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 26 08:58:08 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83854106566C for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 08:58:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hm@hm.net.br) Received: from msrv.matik.com.br (msrv.matik.com.br [187.95.0.181]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C515B8FC0C for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 08:58:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pop1.hm.net.br (pop1.hm.net.br [186.222.209.53]) by msrv.matik.com.br (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q1Q8tH8c093287; Sun, 26 Feb 2012 05:55:17 -0300 (BRT) (envelope-from hm@hm.net.br) X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.3 at msrv.matik.com.br X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 msrv.matik.com.br q1Q8tH8c093287 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=hm.net.br; s=racoon; t=1330246525; bh=m35Tq/stXkKw2X/8ZD80/6LPU0+bbzU22eCL2jl5ZDk=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=IhglngZv5FZ5gHQGz/MpjdSxOwFQ82F65Bysv6JE4JwniJeeRVprp5CsghafjinMe 4anwX+PSldAj/dZnIGKGYGspkuAJvwL53U5wU6EqQH0f2xHQIrXcd0WD2qPN6GmhfP OhVeY0xomgTHVLGkJZpdiaqRc/zVUHgovihE5Dck= Authentication-Results: msrv.matik.com.br; sender-id=pass header.from=hm@hm.net.br; spf=pass smtp.mfrom=hm@hm.net.br Message-ID: <4F49F375.5000002@hm.net.br> Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 05:55:17 -0300 From: H User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Felder References: <4F46847D.4010908@my.gd> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, T_DKIM_INVALID, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2-hm_201202.c X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2-hm_201202.c (2011-06-06) on msrv.matik.com.br Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD9 and the sheer number of problem reports 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: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 08:58:08 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mark Felder wrote: > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:25:01 -0600, Damien Fleuriot > wrote: > >> >> Now, I find the number of problem reports regarding 9.0-RELEASE >> alarming and I'm growing more and more fearful towards it. > > Then stick with the 8.x train until it's no longer supported. > Also, don't you know the rule about running .0 releases in > production? :) > > 9.0 had LOTS of changes. They were very important. It's going to > take a while for the community to fully absorb them and bugs to be > worked out. We don't have enough testers of -CURRENT to prevent > this. Everything seemed stable (ie, no release blockers) for the > people running -CURRENT and -PRERELEASE, BETAs, and RCs, so it was > released. > > But as always, TEST TEST TEST and please have a proper > staging/test environment before you throw your production into > 9.x. > that is all understandable but the point should not be forgotten ... I mean certainly -RELEASE __is__ the production release so, few testers is no excuse, still more when that is a known issue, so a bigger time frame would be the solution until the var _seemed_stable change into _is_stable of course, that is not always so easy but also think of side effects, few_testers could change into still_less when FreeBSD prove to have unstable releases - -- H -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk9J83UACgkQvKVfg5xjCDw7ggCfTpMhHuGqetRHUbKmBmCfRMwn d04An3f8UIdfvtee47NYCS+EjqCk+1t7 =fJbU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----