Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 16:14:03 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> To: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@freebsd.org> Cc: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <freebsd@toco-domains.de>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, svn-ports-head <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r504590 - in head/net: samba46 samba47 samba48 Message-ID: <20190702161403.GA67797@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <8ba4ce85-dc67-ee9a-9767-bcdee3f217d1@FreeBSD.org> References: <CALdFvJENynqPAkKSf5ueuG2nBMr9tckikzZOQv9caXtgcwZg4A@mail.gmail.com> <20190702102316.wv6w5u2ilfaw6vrd@atuin.in.mat.cc> <d9d37be2-8279-af6a-1283-67f25f4f8835@toco-domains.de> <20190702111647.vozqzf4gnqbajvcl@atuin.in.mat.cc> <20190702142827.120588a0@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <122bd115-6a91-bf50-f23a-75871d193cb7@FreeBSD.org> <2f784971-9a27-d904-4d04-52a620db0a3e@toco-domains.de> <6e7e1418-8a5e-d5f2-3cbc-69a224549241@FreeBSD.org> <20190702154834.GA20858@FreeBSD.org> <8ba4ce85-dc67-ee9a-9767-bcdee3f217d1@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 02:02:04AM +1000, Kubilay Kocak wrote: > On 3/07/2019 1:48 am, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > The correct way out of this mess is what had been said before on numerous > > occasion: stable/security/quarterly branches should be operated by ports- > > secteam@ or however it's called, not by the individual committers. This > > would solve *all* the problems of what and how to merge because dedicated > > team would know better and coordinate its action only within itself. > > What and how to merge is obvious, it just hasn't been communicated > effectively, consistently or clearly enough, unless individuals ask on > their own accord, which benefits noone other than that individual. > > Not only does ports-secteam, or any other separate team not have an > understanding of the commits/software/changes that the committer of that > change presumably did, but they also couldn't scale effectively enough > to do so even if we wanted them to. It's not ports-secteams job beyond > cursory review/approval on security only changes. They have said this > themselves. I understand that teams are understaffed, but I simply don't see how this branches thing can work when they're not managed by a dedicated, be it small or large group of people (not necessarily secteam@ or portmgr@). Right now I really don't see *any* benefit of why would I want to track quarterly branches because the way they're currently managed makes them no more stable, better, or less chaotic than -head, only more stale. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20190702161403.GA67797>