Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 01:53:41 +0100 From: Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com> Cc: juha@saarinen.org, joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Staying *really stable* in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010627015341.E5408@canyon.nothing-going-on.org> In-Reply-To: <20010624023403R.jkh@osd.bsdi.com>; from jkh@osd.bsdi.com on Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 02:34:03AM -0700 References: <15157.11221.593513.478892@zircon.zircon.seattle.wa.us> <00cf01c0fc40$c0348db0$0a01a8c0@den2> <20010624023403R.jkh@osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 02:34:03AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > From: "Juha Saarinen" <juha@saarinen.org> > Subject: RE: Staying *really stable* in FreeBSD > Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 12:00:59 +1200 >=20 > > "19.2.2.2. Who needs FreeBSD-STABLE? > > If you are a commercial user or someone who puts maximum stability of > > their FreeBSD system before all other concerns, you should consider > > tracking FreeBSD-STABLE. This is especially true if you have installed >=20 > It's probably time to rewrite that paragraph substantially. It was > something of a tactical error to encourage certain interest groups to > run "work in progress" code, even if that work is very carefully > bounded and kept "in progress" for the shortest periods possible. >=20 > You just can't have a code base which is actually going places and > having things actively updated (which is generally a really good idea, > especially when the updates involved fixing bugs) and also guarantee > that it's particularly usable for anything. Whether it builds > flawlessly without warnings or not, it still represents a fairly > significant unknown quantity until such time as you've frozen the code > and spent a few weeks, at minimum, collecting user reports and making > very carefully selected changes. >=20 > We've also heard any number of suggestions for "fixing" the problem, > from aggressive automated tagging (which would be tremendously > expensive with CVS and not fix the "builds but doesn't work" problem) > to extensive regression test suites that nobody seems to have time to > actually write. >=20 > As I said at the beginning, perhaps it's time to simply re-write the > Handbook paragraph which inadvertently "sells" -stable as a solution > for certain types of problems it was never meant to solve. Done. N --=20 FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://www.freebsd.org/ FreeBSD Documentation Project http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/ --- 15B8 3FFC DDB4 34B0 AA5F 94B7 93A8 0764 2C37 E375 --- --9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAjs5LpQACgkQk6gHZCw343X0agCfbK9WGhkBHYp7y5N6lLc4rKhz Vv4AnjRnz/xxOW498BKQ2h+FjOn6pf7b =y1nH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010627015341.E5408>