Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 22:32:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Feldman <green@unixhelp.org> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -stable vs -current (was Re: solid NFS patch #6... ) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904302231460.40773-100000@janus.syracuse.net> In-Reply-To: <199904302352.QAA41119@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Well, what it comes down to is the number of developers actively
> developing the codebase. We had some truely unfortunate timing with
> people leaving and new people coming on, and pieces of the system ( such
> as NFS ) that simply were left dangling for a long period of time with
> nobody actively locating or fixing bugs. There have been too many critics
> and not enough people getting into the guts of the code and fixing things.
> ( Of course, I'm *very* biased here in my opinion :-) ).
>
> What it comes down to is that a whole lot of changes were made between
> 2.2.x and 3.0 without enough debugging by the authors. This kinda resulted
> in a partially rotting code base even through the 3.1 release, until a
> number of us got sick and tired of it and started actively tracking down
> and fixing the bugs.
>
> I expect the 3.2 release to be a really good release.
>
> It is true that -current has been, more often then not, more stable then
> -stable in the last two months. This is because fixes were being made
> to -current more quickly then they could be backported to -stable. Most
> of these fixes *have* been backported at this point. There are still a
> few that have not that are on my hot list ( and still not addressed, even
> with prodding ). There are also a few bug fixes that simply cannot be
> backported to stable without some pain ( i.e. require the complete
> replacement of a number of subsystems ), and pain is not in the cards
> with the 3.2 release so close.
>
> It is hard enough dealing with two branches of the source tree. I will
> personally take my Super Soaker 5000 to anyone suggesting that we have
> *three* !!!!. Sqirt sqirt sqirt!
5000 is out? YES!!!
>
> I am hoping that we will be able to accomplish a major synchronization
> after the 3.2 release. I personally believe that -current is stable
> enough that we should do one big-assed commit to sync -stable up to the
> current -current and then continue as per normal. I only wish EGCS
> hadn't been incorporated quite yet. At the very least, I want to
> sync *my* stuff up ( NFS/VM/VFS/BIO/VN/SWAPPER ).
I wholeheartedly agree with this idea!
>
> -Matt
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
>
Brian Feldman _ __ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___
green@unixhelp.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! _ __ | _ \ _ \ |) |
http://www.freebsd.org _ |___)___/___/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9904302231460.40773-100000>