From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Nov 18 7:27:18 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDAB037B401 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 07:27:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from ene.asda.gr (ene.asda.gr [193.92.118.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21DF843E6E for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 07:27:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lefty@ene.asda.gr) Received: from ene.asda.gr (lefty.ene.asda.gr [193.92.118.162]) by ene.asda.gr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1283B3FEB; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:27:14 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <3DD906DB.5591BF01@ene.asda.gr> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 17:27:23 +0200 From: Lefteris Tsintjelis Organization: ASDA X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,el MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Caley Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -STABLE was stable for long time (Re: FreeBSD: Server or DesktopOS?) References: <3DD8FD2B.8A95364E@ene.asda.gr> <200211181458.gAIEwlJP027099@pele.r.caley.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Richard Caley wrote: > > > I think the best thing is to keep things as simple as possible. > > But no simpler. > > > I personally think that a fix should always be a fix > > that is like saying a cure for cancer should be a cure for > cancer. Fine. It wouldn't be called a cure for a cancer otherwise). > How do you know it is a cure and how do you know what > the side effects will be. I think the answer is obviously, long time testing and monitoring. > If life could ever be that simple we wouldn't need _any_ branches. So lets not make any other sub-branches of branches and patches to comlicate things even further. > A lot of testing goes into what becomes a release. People using the > RELEASE branch have a reasonable expectation that it will have been > tested to that standard. That amount of testing can't be done for > every fix applied to the STABLE branch. Occasionally there will be a > fix which will break something else that no one thought to > test. > > Basicly, you can't have somethign which is stable and which gets fixed > quickly, the two aims are in opposition. But you can have a -STABLE that is reliable and *critical* patches are applied quickly. I believe that this is what mostly this thread is about. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message