From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 15 23:39:47 2003 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 0736016A4CE for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:39:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp4.server.rpi.edu (smtp4.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E33F43F93 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:39:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp4.server.rpi.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hAG7dhtp005460; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 02:39:43 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20031116002004.J10222-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> References: <20031116002004.J10222-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 02:39:42 -0500 To: Jeff Roberson From: Garance A Drosihn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS-UP new statfs structure 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: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:39:47 -0000 At 12:21 AM -0500 11/16/03, Jeff Roberson wrote: >On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > > Or maybe the real problem is that we claim that there will > > be no API/ABI changes after X.0-RELEASE, and we've really >> missed that mark with 5.0-RELEASE, for a variety of reasons. >> If we're going to keep missing that mark with the 6.x-series, >> then we should plan to do something to make life a little > > less painful. > >The API and ABI are frozen when we make 5.x-STABLE and >branch 6.x. Until then it's open to change. This was >decided up front. Hmm, Yes it was. I was mixing up the time of X.0-RELEASE and making the branch for -current. Good point. Please note that I'm not unhappy with any of these changes. I think they're all very good to get in. But we do have hundreds of developers trying to track -current, and I think we'd get some productivity boost whenever we can make these changes a little smoother. As I mentioned earlier, it's only going to get worse as we have more developers trying to contribute. Developers that we *do* want to be tracking -current... -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu