From owner-freebsd-stable  Fri Jun  7 19:40:44 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA23011
          for stable-outgoing; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 19:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA22990;
          Fri, 7 Jun 1996 19:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Root.COM (8.7.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA12036; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 19:40:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199606080240.TAA12036@Root.COM>
X-Authentication-Warning: implode.Root.COM: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
cc: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>, nate@sri.MT.net, stable@FreeBSD.org,
        committers@FreeBSD.org, scanner@webspan.net
Subject: Re: Status of -stable 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 06 Jun 1996 13:32:32 PDT."
             <17488.834093152@time.cdrom.com> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 1996 19:40:32 -0700
Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>> Well, I liked -stable too!  Are you sure you're not over-reacting to
>> the recent nightmare?  That pesky post-traumatic stress syndrome thing?
>> Hey, in time, the night sweats and flashbacks will pass. :-)
>
>:-)
>
>No, it's been a matter of concern for some time, actually.  David and
>I have been talking about -stable in hushed tones of "What the f***
>are we going to do about this wart long-term?  We can't keep doing
>this!" for at least a year.  This may have been the last straw, but it
>was hardly the only (or even most significant) one.  It's an ongoing
>maintainance headache and we really don't have the resources to do
>this, it's just that simple.
>
>Either we make the process simpler (ditch CVS) or we get a lot more
>people to work on FreeBSD and do it by brute force (yuck), but we
>can't keep doing it with what we've got now.

   I really don't think that using a different source control system is going
to make any difference. The problem we're faced with is with the source trees
diverging too quickly. No matter what source control system we use, it's still
not going to be able to resolve include-file dependencies, variable name/type
changes, and miscellaneous architectural changes that make merging impossible.
This is a problem with trying to keep a moldy source tree "in sync" with things
happening in -current. It's possible to manage for about the first 3 months,
but when the time approaches 1 year (like it is now), it becomes a bloody
nightmare.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project