From owner-freebsd-current Sun Dec 8 17:43:31 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id RAA06812 for current-outgoing; Sun, 8 Dec 1996 17:43:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id RAA06807 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 1996 17:43:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by root.com (8.7.6/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA04389; Sun, 8 Dec 1996 17:41:34 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199612090141.RAA04389@root.com> X-Authentication-Warning: implode.root.com: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: George Michaelson cc: Chuck Robey , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: siguing into current from a random version In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 09 Dec 1996 11:09:03 +1000." <15134.850093743@connect.com.au> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Sun, 08 Dec 1996 17:41:34 -0800 Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >I suppose an assumption many neophytes like myself make is that CVS commits >happen to complete sets of *tested* changes and not work in progress, so that >the worst-case state is the testing (by author/cvs-changer) didn't cover for >ones own particular setup and circumstances. That's the ideal, but we all make mistakes. >Looks like you're saying its more fluid, and simply doing a make world on >the result of a sup on current is caveat emptor. More or less, but we do usually send out warnings about specific things that will need to be rebuilt or special build procedures that need to be followed when they are needed. >I can handle that, if there is some indication in the logs/readmes/mail to >say when its known current is unrunnable. Commits aren't supposed to be done unless the code has been tested first. There is an exception that is sometimes allowed when the code being worked on isn't part of the main-line stuff. >Thats kinda what the NetBSD doc/CHANGES is all about: things in there reflect >coarser grain documentation than individual CVS commits. By the time its >logged there, its probably 1/2 way stable. We had considered doing this at one point, but eventually decided that it was too much work to maintain and now we just make people read the commit messages...which tend to be higher quality than our counterparts (my opinion of course). >It looks to me like the best bet for a time to re-sync is the xmas holidays >since the frequency of changes to CVS will be lower... That's what you think. :-) -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project