From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 6 00:46:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B1E16A4CE for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2004 00:46:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from crumpet.united-ware.com (ddsl-66-42-172-210.fuse.net [66.42.172.210]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF7D43D1F for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2004 00:46:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mistry.7@osu.edu) Received: from [192.168.0.5] (adsl-68-250-184-205.dsl.wotnoh.ameritech.net [68.250.184.205]) (authenticated bits=0)iA60RvUJ077356 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:27:58 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mistry.7@osu.edu) From: Anish Mistry To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:48:59 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <418C0EED.1060301@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <418C0EED.1060301@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2189393.b8WeqqOoLr"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200411051949.07010.mistry.7@osu.edu> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.64 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on crumpet.united-ware.com Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6.0 and onwards X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:46:26 -0000 --nextPart2189393.b8WeqqOoLr Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 05 November 2004 06:38 pm, Scott Long wrote: > All, > > FreeBSD 5.3 is about to be announced this weekend and will signal the > true kick-off of the 5-STABLE and 6-CURRENT series. We are very excited > about this, both because 5.3 is a good release, and because 6.0 will > give us a chance to, erm, redeem ourselves and our development process > =3D-) > > > There has been quite a bit of discussion about this over the past week > by the developer community. The proposal that I and Poul-Henning have > set forth is to stop gating releases, both major and minor, or features, > and instead gate them on a schedule that is both reasonable and timely. > New -STABLE branched will be made on a calendar-based time line, and > point releases on those branches will be made at regular intervals. We > are still debating the exact time line, but it will fall somewhere > between doing a new -STABLE branch every 12-18 months, and doing point > releases every 4-6 months. Won't branching -STABLE every 12-18 months will be too often? I'm thinking= =20 from the perspective of maintaining remote servers, the prospect of=20 updating across major versions. This would also depend on how long=20 various branch will stay supported and have security updates. As you have= =20 said there won't be a huge 4.x -> 5.x chasm for future releases, but with=20 an accellerated release schedule upgradeablity between branches=20 particularly doing remote upgrades safely will need to be a priority,=20 which is probably a good thing. =2D-=20 Anish Mistry --nextPart2189393.b8WeqqOoLr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBjB+CxqA5ziudZT0RApwUAJ9gp1Kic7/GB3SXXvkXFpwq9X0fDgCfZa29 hpiVSslM9H43OJp0kAagE7k= =aCPn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2189393.b8WeqqOoLr--