From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Oct 13 19:11:33 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DB6737B401 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 19:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from softweyr.com (softweyr.com [65.88.244.127]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C3F743E7B for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 19:11:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from nextgig-8.access.nethere.net ([66.63.140.200] helo=softweyr.com) by softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 180uhW-0006c7-00; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 20:11:22 -0600 Message-ID: <3DAA2AAB.CC3A6D69@softweyr.com> Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 19:23:39 -0700 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Garance A Drosihn Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 6.0 branching (no longer: HEADS UP: 5.0 Feature FreezeOctober 16, 2002) References: <200210112056.g9BKuZEx041686@apollo.backplane.com> <3DA7C3DF.1CFD6978@softweyr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > At 11:40 PM -0700 10/11/02, Wes Peters wrote: > >I think we need to discuss when we will branch 6.x. I think we need > >to wait until we have a 5.x release that is stable enough to consider > >for production workstation usage levels, and hope we may reach that > >point by the 5.2 release. > > It is good to explicitly say something about this topic now, so people > don't think a 6.0-current branch is going to happen right away. > > [...] > > We should be clear that the criteria is "5.x is production quality", > and not "when .x reaches .2". At some point (which might be 5.1) it > will probably be helpful to have an explicit list of what issues need > to be fixed before we can make the new -current branch. With Warner's excellent summation and this, it seems the developer corps are pretty much prepared for this. I just wanted to make sure this had been discussed RECENTLY in public, so nobody is surprised when the 6.x branch doesn't immediately pop up. I agree it's a good idea for everyone to think about what their criteria for "enough success" for 5.x is as well. We've recently seen quite a bit of discussion on several features that people want to get into 5.0, or make default on 5.0, that may or may not be ready for prime time. Making these projects ready to be the default will be a big part of getting 5.x to the point where 6.0 can be branched, I suspect. Fortunately, this seems to have had the desired effect of creating a few moments of introspection, where everyone contemplates what their criteria for success are. That's a good sign, I'm quite glad to be able to report such success to the nay-sayers. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message