Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 18:12:44 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: stable@freebsd.org Cc: Jarkko Santala <jake@iki.fi> Subject: Re: 4.8-RELEASE vs SA-03:07 Message-ID: <20030402021244.GA7705@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <20030401222116.GB5246@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <20030401141454.N43325-100000@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <87znnaw7vq.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net> <20030401224035.R474@trillian.santala.org> <20030401222116.GB5246@rot13.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 02:21:16PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 10:54:44PM +0300, Jarkko Santala wrote: > > > IMHO _nothing_ should be called X.Y-RELEASE unless it is truly > > X.Y-RELEASE. This goes for any files on ftp and any cvs repositories. Once > > you tag something as X.Y-RELEASE or once you make any files public with > > that name on it, it becomes that release. > > A consequence of having an open source repository is that people have > access during every stage of the release engineering process. Are you > suggesting that all source access be locked out from the time the tag > is laid down until it's been tested and passes final QA? Needing to > adjust tags is a normal and expected part of making a FreeBSD > release..without it the releases would be much poorer quality. I think this does not automaticly follow. If you use the -RC label for identifying the release when it's in a state of final QA and not to identify the release when it's in -ALPHA or -BETA state, then you avoid using the -RELEASE label when it's still possible that tags slide. Of course the downside is that once you built and validated the -RC bits, and are ready to call it "The Release", you have to put down the actual -RELEASE label (on top of the -RC label) and rebuild the release from scratch so that the actual release will include the sources that have the -RELEASE tag. This generally causes a couple of days delay, but will assure that if you put down a -RELEASE tag, it will be the release. It's a naming issue, not a process issue. I don't think our naming is immediately obvious, which causes confusion at first and triggers threads like this... -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030402021244.GA7705>