Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:56:09 -0400 From: Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> To: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <tz@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version Message-ID: <6f68460a-2fb6-2234-f7c1-0c15ba75a551@columbus.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <e1096c3c-d661-7d70-0073-2439cee3c88e@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAO%2BPfDeFz1JeSwU3f21Waz3nT2LTSDAvD%2B8MSPRCzgM_0pKGnA@mail.gmail.com> <20170622121856.haikphjpvr6ofxn3@ivaldir.net> <dahnkctsm1elbaqlarl8b9euouaplqk2tv@4ax.com> <8e69aff9-4288-fe1e-53df-83a0d74fbe82@columbus.rr.com> <e1096c3c-d661-7d70-0073-2439cee3c88e@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6/22/2017 11:30 AM, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: > On 22.06.2017 21:26, Baho Utot wrote: >> On 6/22/2017 10:03 AM, scratch65535@att.net wrote: >>> [Default] On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:18:56 +0200, Baptiste Daroussin >>> <bapt@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>> >>>> As usual with such proposal, where do you find the manpower to >>>> handle the number >>>> of branches required (the quarterly branches are already hard to >>>> maintain, it is >>>> only one branch). >>> Please help me out here, Baptiste, because I'm apparently missing >>> *something*. >>> >>> Out in industry, if you haven't enough people to do a new >>> high-quality release every N months, and you can't get a >>> headcount increase, then you cut the release schedule. Can't do >>> 4 releases a year? Cut back to 2. Still too many? Cut back to >>> 1. >>> >>> The alternatives to cutting the schedule are that (a) people >>> begin burning out and quitting, (b) quality drops and your >>> customer base begins abandoning you, or (c) both of the above. >>> >>> Why don't the same choices apply here? What am I missing? >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> >> I am looking at OpenBSD to replace FreeBSD. They have a more relaxed >> update schedule and that fits with what I need. > > Go ahead with whatever fits your needs. > > But since the ports-tree is a subversion repository it is really easy > to maintain the status you want. I do this for various customer and my > various server. > >> I am looking for a system that is very stable and doesn't do the >> upgrade path for the sake of it being newer. > > Which has various downsides. I remember for example various linux LTS > distros, which only apply security fixes. I discovered various bugs > which stay there for years, because they are not security issues - > they just hurt you daily. :D > No not really I ran LFS servers and desktops for 10 years >> Having a "releng ports" version that goes with a releng version of >> the OS would be great by me. Linux from scratch does this and it >> works very well. > > It really does not work well. In everyday situation this results in > "heck we need a new server to get a new version of a needed software, > because we need a new linux version". > I regularly seeing admins setting up different Ubuntu versions, > because at one you have PHP 7 and on the other MySQL 5.7, but not both > at the same Ubuntu version. BSD != Linux so your comparison is invalid. One could still use releng 11.0 ports with 10.3 OS could they not
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6f68460a-2fb6-2234-f7c1-0c15ba75a551>