Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:26:16 -0600
From:      Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
To:        Mark Blackman <mark@exonetric.com>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, Mark Saad <nonesuch@longcount.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle
Message-ID:  <20120127032616.GB32500@lonesome.com>
In-Reply-To: <A838D705-5B4B-4EA5-8BC6-11BEA4FF593B@exonetric.com>
References:  <CADWvR2ioJo2oy=0FTRv-BiMHGG3KB1AERjuu0FOk_yCqsGzukg@mail.gmail.com> <201201260937.47448.jhb@freebsd.org> <6D5F6ECE-5966-4849-AFDC-7F385E2CE906@exonetric.com> <201201261322.29688.jhb@freebsd.org> <ECFE9ADA-9E54-44A6-ADCA-2511462EBB67@exonetric.com> <20120126224921.GA26109@lonesome.com> <A838D705-5B4B-4EA5-8BC6-11BEA4FF593B@exonetric.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:52:44PM +0000, Mark Blackman wrote:
> I suspect poor old RE is putting too much work into BETAs and RCs for
> point releases. 

The counter-argument is that we have a lot more leeway to make mistakes
on a .0 release.  We're not going to be cut any slack at all for shipping
a badly regressed point release.

Some minor regressions are inevitable in software, but they do indeed
need to be minor.

For how we're doing with regressions in general, see:

  http://people.freebsd.org/~linimon/studies/prs/prs_for_tag_regression.html

Now, it's true that many of the recent PRs are against 9.0, and many of
the ones that aren't may be stale (certainly most of the pre-2010 ones),
but these are the types of things that users really notice and become
unhappy about.

mcl



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120127032616.GB32500>