From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 17 16:33:03 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA6216A403 for ; Thu, 17 May 2007 16:33:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AB5413C483 for ; Thu, 17 May 2007 16:33:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FB5C1A3C19; Thu, 17 May 2007 09:33:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B8B2451488; Thu, 17 May 2007 12:33:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 12:33:01 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Chris Message-ID: <20070517163301.GA7602@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <3aaaa3a0705170830g46487cc7occc8a51b82a9118b@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3aaaa3a0705170830g46487cc7occc8a51b82a9118b@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fast rate of major FreeBSD releases to STABLE 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: Thu, 17 May 2007 16:33:03 -0000 On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 04:30:50PM +0100, Chris wrote: > The recent ports freeze has also concerned me, this is the longest > ports freeze I have witnessed since I started using FreeBSD years ago > and its for a desktop element of the os, does it matter if servers > running FreeBSD have to remain on vulnerable versions of ports as a > result of this? I'll leave the src release discussion for others, and just remark that this claim is entirely false: every release cycle has had a longer ports freeze than this one, with the same consequences. We don't take freezes lightly, and the alternative is to import a bunch of incompletely tested changes that will cause untold chaos for our users. I'm sure you wouldn't advocate that. Kris (for portmgr)