From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 2 03:03:29 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7710EFB; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 03:03:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2lp0240.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.240]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.protection.outlook.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B189F1858; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 03:03:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2601:2:4780:2fd:3cfa:1b41:db29:34df] (10.255.156.132) by BY1PR0301MB0837.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (25.160.193.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1019.16; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 03:03:20 +0000 Message-ID: <54053372.6020009@my.hennepintech.edu> Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 22:03:14 -0500 From: Andrew Berg User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer , Michelle Sullivan , Sam Fourman Jr. Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool References: <20140901195520.GB77917@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <54050D07.4010404@sorbs.net> <540522A3.9050506@sorbs.net> <54052891.5000104@my.hennepintech.edu> <54052DFA.4030808@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <54052DFA.4030808@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.255.156.132] X-ClientProxiedBy: CH1PR03CA010.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.255.156.155) To BY1PR0301MB0837.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (25.160.193.143) X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;UriScan:; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0322B4EDE1 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(6009001)(24454002)(189002)(199003)(80022001)(47776003)(87266999)(93886004)(99396002)(50466002)(50986999)(21056001)(75432001)(85306004)(117636001)(90102001)(59896002)(4396001)(88552001)(64706001)(86362001)(23676002)(65956001)(76176999)(54356999)(42186005)(101416001)(99136001)(20776003)(81542001)(87976001)(83322001)(102836001)(83506001)(77096002)(92566001)(92726001)(83072002)(85852003)(74502001)(74662001)(31966008)(65816999)(81342001)(106356001)(95666004)(64126003)(107046002)(79102001)(76482001)(46102001)(105586002)(77982001)(89122001)(89472002); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0301MB0837; H:[IPv6:2601:2:4780:2fd:3cfa:1b41:db29:34df]; FPR:; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:0; LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: my.hennepintech.edu Cc: ports@freebsd.org, pkg@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin , stable@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 03:03:29 -0000 On 2014.09.01 21:39, Julian Elischer wrote: > sigh.. when are we as a project, all going to learn that reality in > business is > that you often need to install stuff that is old. Its not always your > choice. > The custommers require it.. > You should try arguing with someone like Bank of Americas security and > operations > department some day about whether they want to suddenly upgrade 300 > machines > for no real reason (from their perspective). FreeBSD minor version upgrades are meant to be non-disruptive. However, I will admit that I have not performed any such upgrades in a critical environment, so if you think they are disruptive, please enlighten me with the details. Also, there are options out there for getting support for extended periods if you need it. Some companies are built around providing support for things that the original developers have long abandoned because some businesses need it.