From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 23 11:22:28 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A38816A4CE for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:22:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF9243D2F for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:22:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from peterjeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from server.vk2pj.dyndns.org (c211-30-75-229.belrs2.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.75.229]) i7NBMIL16311; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:22:19 +1000 Received: from server.vk2pj.dyndns.org (localhost.vk2pj.dyndns.org [127.0.0.1])i7NBMIEW080899; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:22:18 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from peter@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org) Received: (from peter@localhost) by server.vk2pj.dyndns.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i7NBMI44080898; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:22:18 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from peter) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:22:18 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy To: Pawel Malachowski Message-ID: <20040823112218.GA80820@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <6E7EB9E8-F4BD-11D8-94CF-003065781ED0@runbox.com> <20040823045620.GG15251@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <20040823105400.GA42452@shellma.zin.lublin.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040823105400.GA42452@shellma.zin.lublin.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What is Stable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:22:28 -0000 On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 12:54:00PM +0200, Pawel Malachowski wrote: >5.x is actually frozen, I mean, there is no development branch for 5.x. >There are some minor fixes being commited to HEAD, but they won't be in >RELENG_5 because of code freeze. Depending on how important the fixes are, they may wind up in RELENG_5 and maybe 5.3. All you need to do is convince re@ that the change is important enough to go in. > Will these fixes be incorporated to RELENG_5 after 5.3-RELEASE is out? Maybe - if they are relevant to RELENG_5. > 5.3R schedule says about October. >Isn't it increasing a risk of `fixed-in-current-long-time-ago-but- >-forgotten-MFC' hell? ;) According to the schedule, 5.3 is about 6 weeks off. It's normal to freeze the RELENG_n branch whilst RELENG_n_m is being prepared. This makes it much easier to move the RELENG_n_m tags if necessary. Note that there hasn't been any excuse for forgetting MFC's for several years now: The "MFC after" tags in commit messages automatically generate reminder e-mails to the committer. >Wasn't it better to branch both RELENG_5 (open) and RELENG_5_3 (frozen) >and allow developers to put changes in RELENG_5 after playing in HEAD >as usual, without the need of waiting to October? Important fixes can still be MFC'd as long as re@ agrees. This sort of issue seems to arise just before every release - code freezes are always flagged well in advance, giving people plenty of time to commit general changes. Peter