From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 17 22:02:43 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3551065670; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:02:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) Received: from mail.netconsonance.com (mail.netconsonance.com [198.207.204.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B82F18FC16; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:02:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) Received: from [10.66.240.106] (public-wireless.sv.svcolo.com [64.13.135.30]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netconsonance.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m8HM2Dbi002337; Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:02:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jrhett@netconsonance.com) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at netconsonance.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.014 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.014 tagged_above=-999 required=3.5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1.44, AWL=0.426] Message-Id: <0C2C7E9B-61E3-4720-B76F-4745A3C963DA@netconsonance.com> From: Jo Rhett To: Robert Watson In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:02:07 -0700 References: <1219409496.10487.22.camel@bauer.cse.buffalo.edu> <593618A3-56DA-4891-A4A0-690E9A9C5B32@netconsonance.com> <20080904133604.GB1188@atarininja.org> <47d0403c0809051319r3c82f87bhdb15ce5b0167987a@mail.gmail.com> <2742CAB1-8FF2-425D-A3B6-0658D7DB8F4D@netconsonance.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928.1) Cc: freebsd-stable , Wesley Shields , Nathan Way , Ben Kaduk Subject: Re: Upcoming Releases Schedule... X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:02:43 -0000 > On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Jo Rhett wrote: >> Robert, I'd like to point out to you that when I complained about >> 6.2's accelerated EoL, I was soundly boxed around the ears and told >> that I should have been paying attention to the projected EoL date >> when we decided to roll out 6.2 across the business. >> >> Now you are saying that expected EoL will be determined at some >> random point in the future based on gut feelings about how well a >> completely different branch is doing. >> >> How can I reconcile these disparate points of view? How does one >> focus on testing and upgrade cycle for an "appropriately supported >> release" when the decision for the support cycle is completely up >> in the air? > On Sep 16, 2008, at 12:47 PM, Robert Watson wrote: > The FreeBSD Project, as with any other company or organization, > responds to events as they occur. We try to plan ahead, and when > things go better or worse than expected, we sometimes change the > plans. As far as I know we've never *shortened* the expected > support timeline for any branch or release, but we have on occasion > lenthened them when we feel it's important to do so. I'm not sure > what other answer is possible. No other answer. But nobody has yet provided what the EoL period is going to be. I have no problems with a period being extended ;-) But the business needs to know the minimum EoL for a given release to determine if upgrading to that release is viable. -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness