Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:18:19 +0300 (EET DST) From: "Andrew V. Stesin" <stesin@elvisti.kiev.ua> To: davidg@Root.COM Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, jdp@polstra.com, nate@sri.MT.net, stable@freebsd.org, committers@freebsd.org, scanner@webspan.net Subject: Re: Status of -stable Message-ID: <199606100818.LAA16906@office.elvisti.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <199606080240.TAA12036@Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Jun 7, 96 07:40:32 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello people, just my Andy User's $0.02 ;) # I really don't think that using a different source control system is going # to make any difference. The problem we're faced with is with the source trees # diverging too quickly. No matter what source control system we use, it's still # not going to be able to resolve include-file dependencies, variable name/type # changes, and miscellaneous architectural changes that make merging impossible. # This is a problem with trying to keep a moldy source tree "in sync" with things # happening in -current. It's possible to manage for about the first 3 months, # but when the time approaches 1 year (like it is now), it becomes a bloody # nightmare. Yes, that's obvious. I think the whole idea of having two branches _both_ developed but with different speed is a vaste of human power. (Why did they invented this? I thought...) Why won't you FreeBSD gurus say so: "Ok, here is FreeBSD-XX.XX-release. Now after the release date this source branch will be called '-bug' (minus-one-bug :) and it won't be developed, only obvious bugs easy to fix will probably be fixed. This source branch will be frozen and forgotten at the time when the snapshots of new -release are available for testing. Either you stay alone with whatever is your good-old-FreeBSD, or you go and help us to test snapshots, this way getting some bugfixes -- and probably some inconveniences (read: new bugs :) , too, but this way your'e donating your time for testing. Point." If FreeBSD is free for whoever needs it to be free of $$ charge -- it was declared as such, so probably let it be; but I told you many month ago: with -stable you are dividing the user community and the resources of manpower and time people are ready to spend for those damn tasks like testing -- testing, testing... -- raw BY HALF. I continue thinking it wasn't wise. # # -DG # # David Greenman # Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project -- With best regards -- Andrew Stesin. +380 (44) 2760188 +380 (44) 2713457 +380 (44) 2713560 "You may delegate authority, but not responsibility." Frank's Management Rule #1.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606100818.LAA16906>