Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:20:33 +0000 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: Ben Kaduk <minimarmot@gmail.com> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Konstantin Belousov <kib@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r241896 - in head: . cddl/contrib/opensolaris/lib/libzpool/common/sys share/man/man9 sys/cam/ctl sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/kern sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/sys sys/cddl/contrib/openso... Message-ID: <CAJ-FndBRFJFZ_h_fY%2B=Wux_DfMr4V0RrqyiKPh64WmiTDm3o4g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAK2BMK7W%2B0EqkRYyvRQoSAChdgcRJXZiSmfoE=Xj3evy4C7THQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <201210221750.q9MHot26061585@svn.freebsd.org> <CAK2BMK5c==SJ%2BySe7S70ZJyph_2X%2BdU%2B9zBftdatWqTVsH5rsA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-FndCTQjxbhpv-nA_oiVcHbKxwvpG_0qN9Cr4HV7_xfSQbeQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK2BMK7srogaYt6Y9fp=HYSY64NXwBSFDHTuXiMYhbPmOD2NAg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-FndDF%2BM_QALAuL_z9b5X_T4=En7Ek26u0kbqMEANcWLVcLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK2BMK7W%2B0EqkRYyvRQoSAChdgcRJXZiSmfoE=Xj3evy4C7THQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 11:17 PM, Ben Kaduk <minimarmot@gmail.com> wrote: > I do not wish to belabor the point; we all have better things to do > with our time. Hopefully this is my last message on the topic. > > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> The point is that KPI/KBI of -CURRENT can change as long as >> __FreeBSD_version is bumped (and if you really want to know my >> opinion, I already see this as a forceful thing because it would not >> be necessary in my mind, but I second the will of the majority of >> developers). So, if the KPI/KBI changes all the thirdy part code, >> ports and everything else must adapt. > > Yes, everything must adapt to changes in -current. I am arguing that, > if it is easy to do so, we should make the user experience for > *ordinary users* running -current as nice as possible. If we do not > have ordinary users running current, then our code does not get > real-world testing until RC builds, or even the .0 release. I think > it is well-accepted that we want to have the code in -current get > real-world testing; making the user experience nicer helps this to > happen. To me, it seems that the user experience is nicer if the KPI > change is delayed from the KBI change. We have mechanisms in place > that can enforce __FreeBSD_Version of kernel modules must match the > version of the running kernel, so I do not see how this procedure > would lead to silent binary incompatibility. The courtesy you are mentioning here is the __FreeBSD_Version. Having stricter rule would just meaning doing under-performing and unclean job. > >> MPSAFE flag is not any longer supported and code needs to be ported >> appropriately to -CURRENT interface. > > That is the present state of affairs, yes. I am asking only, "think > of the users; can we make things easier for them?". > Maybe not in this case, but as something to keep in mind for the future. I can understand your concern, but people using -CURRENT must be well aware of the fact that this is a development branch and they cannot expect too many safety belt mechanisms to be in place. I think that the current model (break KBI/KPI at will, give ports/thirdy part a way to recognize it via __FreeBSD_Version and move on) is optimal because it doesn't limit the developer neither leaves the user completely without a landmark on how to fix the problem. It is all balancing in finding compromises :) Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-FndBRFJFZ_h_fY%2B=Wux_DfMr4V0RrqyiKPh64WmiTDm3o4g>