From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 13 06:11:44 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F54116A4CE for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:11:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.atlantis.dp.ua (smtp.atlantis.dp.ua [193.108.46.231]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE92843D31 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:11:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua) Received: from smtp.atlantis.dp.ua (smtp.atlantis.dp.ua [193.108.46.231]) by smtp.atlantis.dp.ua (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i1DEBMvA026869 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:11:22 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:11:22 +0200 (EET) From: Dmitry Pryanishnikov To: stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040213151748.G10885@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: next release X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:11:44 -0000 Hello! On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:15:51 -0800, Dave Tweten wrote: > oberman@es.net said: >>Now you see why I recommend that people wait for a month after a release >>to update and to do it to STABLE, not release. > > I agree wholeheartedly. I'm surprised your truth was accepted as calmly > as it was. When I offered the same suggestion a few years ago I was > thoroughly flamed. I think that not many developers read stable@ anymore, because development process is focused on CURRENT these days. So relative calmness is quite expected by me ;) In my opinion, RELENG_4_x is more preferrable for the use in production environment, because new features (and associated bugs) may come into the STABLE just after the end of the freeze (not waiting for the one month after it). The only exceptions are serious bugs like broken fxp driver in 4.7-RELEASE, but I think that it's better to fix those local bugs using the local patches than to export new possible bugs from the STABLE. The only problem that I see in this approach is that one must reapply all local patches after CVSupping sources (possibly modifying them according to the changes in RELENG_4_x). Sincerely, Dmitry -- Atlantis ISP, System Administrator e-mail: dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE