From owner-freebsd-current Thu Mar 14 16:40:19 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D048F37B405; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from peter3.wemm.org ([12.232.27.13]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020315004009.IMLD1147.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@peter3.wemm.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:40:09 +0000 Received: from overcee.wemm.org (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by peter3.wemm.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g2F0e8s42471; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:40:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D022138CC; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:40:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Murray Stokely Cc: developers@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, re@FreeBSD.ORG, portmgr@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: CVS Issues with branch.. Was: Re: HEADS UP: Be nice to -CURRENT ( "1 week Feature Slush" ) In-Reply-To: <20020308101724.GA8515@freebsdmall.com> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:40:08 -0800 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20020315004008.D022138CC@overcee.wemm.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Murray Stokely wrote: > On March 15, a RELENG_5_0_DP1 branch will be created in CVS for > final release polishing. This will allow us to provide translated > release notes, sync up sysinstall and the package set, bump version > numbers, and tweak default diagnostic settings without further > impacting -CURRENT developers. Commits to this branch will require > re@ approval. Actually, with my CVS hat on, I have a *huge* problem with this. We have a large number of "temporary" repo copies in place that are to be deleted (ie: rm -rf) soon. This was with the plan that there would be *NO* persistant branches and that it would be rm'ed long before the RELENG_5 branch began. I had a quick look and I immediately found 55MB of duplicated repo files. That's over 5% of the repo right now. I want to know what expectations people have by calling this a "RELENG_5_XX" branch.. Given that this stuff is going to be rm'ed within a month, that will break RELENG_5_DP1 when that happens. People will no longer be able to cvsup or check out -r RELENG_5_DP1 and have it build. Specifically, gcc and gdb will not build. If this is going to be a "static" release (calling it RELENG_5_anything is a mistake IMHO) then this isn't a big deal. But if people are expecting it to have ongoing secirity fixes etc like we do with RELENG_4_5 etc then we have a problem, because it cannot last very long at all. Accordingly, I would much prefer that the branch (if we have to have it) would be called SNAPSHOT_5_DP1 or soemthing, so that the "RELENG_" prefix doesn't unduely raise expectations that it will keep working, or move the DP1 release elsewhere if we want it to remain cvsup'able long term. The other option is to do some hackery after the branch is set down so that the *.291 and *.295 temporary copies do not exist in the branch, and accordingly wont get broken when they are cvs rm -rf'ed. (Hmm, this might be the best option from a cvs perspective, if people dont mind the fact that -current and DP1 will have some files in different places..) Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message