From owner-freebsd-current Thu Mar 14 18:27:59 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 2FB7F37B41E; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:27:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from bmah.dyndns.org ([12.233.149.189]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020315022718.MERX1147.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@bmah.dyndns.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 02:27:18 +0000 Received: (from bmah@localhost) by bmah.dyndns.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g2F2RIe27557; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:27:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bmah) Message-Id: <200203150227.g2F2RIe27557@bmah.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Peter Wemm Cc: Murray Stokely , current@FreeBSD.ORG, re@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CVS Issues with branch.. Was: Re: HEADS UP: Be nice to -CURRENT ( "1 week Feature Slush" ) In-reply-to: <20020315004008.D022138CC@overcee.wemm.org> References: <20020315004008.D022138CC@overcee.wemm.org> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Wemm message dated "Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:40:08 -0800." From: "Bruce A. Mah" Reply-To: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG X-Face: g~c`.{#4q0"(V*b#g[i~rXgm*w;:nMfz%_RZLma)UgGN&=j`5vXoU^@n5v4:OO)c["!w)nD/!!~e4Sj7LiT'6*wZ83454H""lb{CC%T37O!!'S$S&D}sem7I[A 2V%N&+ X-Image-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Images/bmah-cisco-small.gif X-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:27:18 -0800 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 [Trimming Cc list a little bit] If memory serves me right, Peter Wemm wrote: > Actually, with my CVS hat on, I have a *huge* problem with this. In the future, if you see such huge problems come up, a little more advance notice might be nice. :-( > 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. Is there more to this plan? This is news to me and I would like to get up to speed. > 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. Differences of opinion on naming aside...the branch isn't supposed to last long at all. The point is to provide a slightly polished snapshot to the wider developer community. We can't do the QA/releng work on HEAD without calling for a code freeze (which we early on decided that we would *not* do). Since it's not a formal release, we won't be doing security fixes, etc. I can't imagine why anyone would expect to cvsup this thing at some point in the distant future, especially after 5.0-DP2 and 5.0-RELEASE. Just thinking off the top of my head, having it break soon after 5.0-DP1 might not be fatal, as long as we have the CDROM and FTP areas still intact. Did you have a definite date for the rm-ing in mind? Thanks, Bruce. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message