Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 14:25:56 +0300 (EET DST) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: "Karl Denninger, MCSNet" <karl@mcs.com>, Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.de>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The -stable problem: my view Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960608140147.26929H-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <9761.834230734@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 8 Jun 1996, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > A great idea! But why does this all openly come out only now? At least > > part of the solution might be just saying - maintainers and mergerers > > for stable needed! Would more volunteer based development of -stable be > > realy that hard? > > Because I also think that if you're going to go down the road of > supporting a legacy code base, you might as well do it all the way and > stop fooling around with something that, if it becomes at all > successful, will have highly conservative people counting on it. Yes, I may agree that people using -stable (and that includes me) may be a bit more conservative (I know people who claim that FreeBSD is alltogether conservative). But some people too need stability even if a bit more conservative stability. There used to be for some time almost a FAQ on the -questions list - i you have a AHA2940, upgrade to stable. The problem seems to be that -stable has stopped being a development base (was it even intended to be one?) and became a bug-fix base to which anything from -current is almost impossible to add. The -stable branch in itself is good, but the burden of keeping it should be mostly taken away from the shoulders of the core-team and put on the shoulders of some-one else. Let's put it on the stable-folk? And if there is no-one who can keep the -stable tree up and working, then why should it be kept? There surely is no reason to waste time of those who could be making FreeBSD much better on keeping up an older and more conservative tree. > -stable has shown that production branches take on an identity of > their own, which is a fine thing in and of itself but something with > its own identity also needs a focal point to make sure that things > stay on a reasonable track. I think that this needs to be at least > one full-time position and, since trailing-edge development is no fun, > it probably won't come from the volunteer pool (you could get someone, > sure, but not the kind of full-timer I'd be hoping for). > I have no resources for financing someone doing full-time job. I couldn't do it even here, much the less in US with US salaries. All I can contribute is my spare time and even that not before I have passed my exams (otherwise I shall have no time at all to contribute). Sander > Jordan >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960608140147.26929H-100000>