From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 8 00:29:48 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D76CA16A4C0 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 00:29:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABC2E43FF5 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 00:29:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from DougB@freebsd.org) Received: from master.dougb.net (12-234-22-23.client.attbi.com[12.234.22.23](untrusted sender)) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id <2003090807294601100kqvvee>; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 07:29:46 +0000 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 00:29:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton To: "Gary W. Swearingen" In-Reply-To: <4k7k4kjbpz.k4k@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <20030908001530.T22654@znfgre.qbhto.arg> References: <3F5B4AA9.1000003@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <4k7k4kjbpz.k4k@mail.comcast.net> Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-message-flag: Outlook -- Not just for spreading viruses anymore! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: Michel Talon cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The Old Way Was Better X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 07:29:49 -0000 On Sun, 7 Sep 2003, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: > Michel Talon writes: > > > In my opinion, the 4.* series should not > > have been maintained so long (except for security fixes), it stresses > > too much the available developer workforce. Developers work on whatever branches it suits their fancy to work on. > So when should non-security 4.* work have stopped? When I started > using FreeBSD, the 5.0 target was Nov'2001, IIRC, and it was supposed > to have features than are not yet in 5-CURRENT. The decision to delay any kind of release in the 5.x branch was the right one to make. The fact that it's still missing features that we wanted to have 2 years ago should give you an idea of why. :) > How long should 4.* users have to live with a moribund OS? 4.x users don't HAVE to live with anything. They are free to use any other version, or any other operating system they want to use if 4.x doesn't meet their needs. As for the rest of your post, it's all very interesting, but incredibly unlikely to happen. The creation of the RELENG_4_X branches solved the immediate need for a "stable branch plus security fixes." 5.x is still -current, and while we do need to be more careful with our marketing (and more careful with what goes into a 5.x release), massive branch renaming just isn't going to happen, nor is expanding the number of branches going to help. If there is anything here you don't like, feel free to start coding fixes to the things you don't like. Meanwhile, trying to tell people who are volunteering their time how and where to do so is incredibly unlikely to be successful. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection