From owner-freebsd-current Sun May 3 03:41:00 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA14053 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sun, 3 May 1998 03:41:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (daemon@smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA13982; Sun, 3 May 1998 03:40:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA10156; Sun, 3 May 1998 03:40:00 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpd010151; Sun May 3 03:39:51 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA26478; Sun, 3 May 1998 03:39:49 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199805031039.DAA26478@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: VM changes broke SYSVSHM? To: jb@cimlogic.com.au (John Birrell) Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:39:49 +0000 (GMT) Cc: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, jb@cimlogic.com.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199805022327.JAA10141@cimlogic.com.au> from "John Birrell" at May 3, 98 09:27:47 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > We need to be able to support -current, because for many people 2.2.X > is too far in the past. 8-) But we need to avoid throwing marbles > where bladers are skating. The problem is that -current is not yet released. You can not expect John to go off on a branch in order to let people pretend that -current is -stable. If John's changes need to be shaken out, then you are going to have to put up with instability at some point. If you force him onto a branch, then you are going to end up paying more in the future. The code on the branch will not be nearly as well tested as if it weren't on a branch. You should also consider that John's changes are not gratuitous. They fix bugs. I think th qualitative difference would be that, if the changes were on a branch, then you will have a longer time in which you must live with instabilities and/or unresolved bugs. I, for one, would loudly object to forcing John off onto a branch. The constructive approach would be to work on getting -current stable (AND bug free) enough for a release (IMO). Then your "bladers" can be safe from marbles, and at the same time get to complain about how "3.0 is buggier than the new -current" and "why can't we make -current more stable, given that 3.0 is too far in the past". 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message