Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:04:32 +0800 From: LI Xin <delphij@delphij.net> To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fast rate of major FreeBSD releases to STABLE Message-ID: <464D25D0.8010003@delphij.net> In-Reply-To: <f2j58r$hap$1@sea.gmane.org> References: <3aaaa3a0705170830g46487cc7occc8a51b82a9118b@mail.gmail.com> <f2j58r$hap$1@sea.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig127BBA2E5F2CAB73F6AF4D3F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ivan Voras wrote: > Chris wrote: >=20 >> and its for a desktop element of the os, does it matter if servers >> running FreeBSD have to remain on vulnerable versions of ports as a >> result of this? >=20 > This looks like another call to have RELENG_x branches on ports, with > which I agree. Hmm... Branching is not about "to do it, or not to do it", but about "who will invest their time to do it". By making it as an official offer we have to make sure that: - "STABLE" branch is well maintained. What's the rule of "MFC" in these branches? For src/ the answer is clear, but for ports/ I do not think it's obvious. What's the standard choosing particular ports' version? Who will be responsible for that? - packages are continuously built and mirrored. This could cause confusion about "should I use -HEAD ports/, or RELENG_X ports/?" Not to mention that it needs a doubled computation resource for package cluster. So, while I agree that having branches is a very nice idea I feel that it is not quite exercisable at the moment. It's easy for committers to do "make universe" to verify that their work does not break build, but it's not that easy for porters to make sure that a commit does not break the -STABLE branch... Cheers, --=20 Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> http://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! --------------enig127BBA2E5F2CAB73F6AF4D3F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGTSXQOfuToMruuMARCiI6AKCFpVnlhLcDy8LB7/pmFBFsOa3j3wCfRJNv PIh4k+LX32PvAromyn+KIfs= =M5yl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig127BBA2E5F2CAB73F6AF4D3F--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?464D25D0.8010003>