Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 23:40:21 +0100 From: Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Cc: Christopher Masto <chris@netmonger.net>, Warner Losh <imp@village.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>, Joseph Scott <joseph.scott@owp.csus.edu>, Brian Somers <brian@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/finger finger.c Message-ID: <39DA6055.594B13E4@originative.co.uk> References: <83262.970607906@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > > If it's now part of your full-time hattism to worry about this then I > hope you'll start spending some number of hours each day in reviewing > each and every change which goes into -stable. However many other I think you're looking at it the wrong way around. The stable team wouldn't be putting in a lot of hours reviewing stable commits. Stable commits would only occur if the stable team did them i.e. no-one else would be allowed to commit to stable. The stable team would then monitor -current, noting commits that are bug fixes, and slating them for a MFC at a later date when it's felt they've had enough of a shakeout. Stable would stagnate to some extent, certainly more so than it presently does, but I think that's exactly what should happen to a stable branch. That's not to say that new features would never make it back to the stable branch but they would certainly do so a lot more slowly and only if there was real value to them and not just because they exist. Paul Richards FreeBSD Services Ltd To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39DA6055.594B13E4>