Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 2 Feb 1995 11:00:27 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Paul Richards <paul@isl.cf.ac.uk>
To:        wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman)
Cc:        rkw@dataplex.net, hackers@freefall.cdrom.com
Subject:   Re: sup:  Ok, I'm gonna do it.
Message-ID:  <199502021100.LAA01626@isl.cf.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <9502012107.AA19660@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> from "Garrett Wollman" at Feb 1, 95 04:07:48 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In reply to Garrett Wollman who said
> 
> <<On Wed, 1 Feb 1995 06:56:24 -0600, rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) said:
> 
> > Perhaps we need a two step commit process. Basically, developers commit to
> > "wanna-be-current". Periodically take a snapshot of this and test to see if
> > everything compiles. If not, it gets bounced! Things that pass the sieve go
> > into "current".
> 
> I think people are missing the point of what ``current'' is (or at
> least, was supposed to be when we set this all up)!
> 
> I am not willing to waste too much effort on making sure that the
> world always compiles; there's no benefit.  I am much more concerned
> about whether things compile at release time, and especially whether a
> source-only upgrade is possible.  I think worrying about it at any other
> time is counterproductive.  (The fact that this is even an issue
> indicates to me that there are WAY too many people supping ``current''
> as it is.)

This is my feeling too. If you're supping -current then expect problems.
-current is *NOT* an upgrade path to fix bugs, that's something we've
always stressed and it is *still* true. In fact, supping -current is
a good way to pick up more serious problems than you had before.

Not that I want to discourage genuine developers getting -current
but if you're moaning about things not working then you're not a
developer since a developer would just fix it or just put up with it
while somone in that area fixes it.

If we're always fussing about -current being release quality then why do we
bother with release cycles. I see no reason for current to get polished up
until we're approaching the test phases.

-- 
  Paul Richards, FreeBSD core team member. 
  Phone: +44 1222 874000 x6646 (work), +44 1222 457651 (home)
  Dept. Mechanical Engineering, University of Wales, College Cardiff.
  Internet: paul@FreeBSD.org,  JANET(UK): RICHARDSDP@CARDIFF.AC.UK



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199502021100.LAA01626>