Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 21 Apr 2012 19:13:20 +0000
From:      Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r234504 - in head/sys: amd64/conf i386/conf
Message-ID:  <20120421191320.GA57272@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120421171128.GA6732@lor.one-eyed-alien.net>
References:  <201204202137.q3KLbhNj056524@svn.freebsd.org> <CAFMmRNy6Ew_A1%2BCAq5Off%2BNxYxEMBHs8ZgfyG7pvVbbR9sCk7Q@mail.gmail.com> <20120421171128.GA6732@lor.one-eyed-alien.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 12:11:28PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 09:45:57AM -0400, Ryan Stone wrote:
> > Excellent!  Thanks to everybody who helped make this happen, starting
> > with the participants at dtrace.conf who gave us the requisite whacks
> > with the clue-by-four.
> > 
> > However, what is our policy for enabling features in -STABLE that are
> > known to be unstable?  If we MFC this I don't have the slightest worry
> > that somebody might see instability in their system just because the
> > hooks are all of a sudden there, but I would worry that somebody make
> > take DTrace hooks being enabled in GENERIC on -STABLE to imply that
> > DTrace is stable, start using it and being upset when they trip over a
> > DTrace bug.
> 
> I think we should note that it remains experimental and somewhat buggy
> in the release notes and probably in the MFC message.  Otherwise, it's
> like any new feature.  If you start using a feature in production
> without extensive testing you may be surprised.

I think that given we're just broken 9.x ice, it should be MFCed.

./danfe



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120421191320.GA57272>