Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:00:53 -0700 From: Jo Rhett <jrhett@netconsonance.com> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>, Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-stable-local@be-well.ilk.org> Subject: Re: Upcoming Releases Schedule... Message-ID: <A33CC6C6-98AB-428C-B78A-71F46839E682@netconsonance.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809222020050.26766@fledge.watson.org> References: <1219409496.10487.22.camel@bauer.cse.buffalo.edu> <CB36FE28-D125-4C22-B5DE-1001515DD8A6@netconsonance.com> <47d0403c0809051319r3c82f87bhdb15ce5b0167987a@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809061159410.28840@fledge.watson.org> <2742CAB1-8FF2-425D-A3B6-0658D7DB8F4D@netconsonance.com> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809162043380.64176@fledge.watson.org> <0C2C7E9B-61E3-4720-B76F-4745A3C963DA@netconsonance.com> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809180022580.13100@fledge.watson.org> <658B8861-1E78-4767-8D3D-8B79CC0BD45F@netconsonance.com> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809181935540.16464@fledge.watson.org> <15F15FD1-3C53-4018-8792-BC63289DC4C2@netconsonance.com> <448wtpcikb.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <C096D142-4572-48DF-8CCA-053B41003A07@netconsonance.com> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809191158330.40909@fledge.watson.org> <34C3D54B-C88C-4C36-B1FE-C07FC27F8CB5@netconsonance.com> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809201102270.22368@fledge.watson.! org> <58B648A5-4F9D-4C02-9A1C-21E1294DEB7A@netconsonance.com> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0809222020050.26766@f! ledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 22, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Robert Watson wrote: > Lack of human resources, to use a vile term, is currently the > limiting factor. What happens when that is cleared is another > question, but in the end there aren't a whole lot of paths to > greater efficiency here: ... > This is an inherently manual process because security patches touch > a variety of parts of the system and each has different > implications, the tendency for vulnerabilities to come in classes, > etc. Great, thanks. Do we have any idea how much additional human resources would be necessary to extend the support period? > because there was significant divergence and maintaining three > active development branches at once (5.x, 6.x, and 7.x) was a > serious stretch. I've never suggested maintaining 3 different release versions, and I wouldn't suggest trying. When Sun, Microsoft, et al decide that they don't have the resources to support 3 major revisions, it's a pretty good reason to think that FreeBSD can't either ;-) -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A33CC6C6-98AB-428C-B78A-71F46839E682>