Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:28:23 -0700 From: mdf@FreeBSD.org To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r220755 - in head: . contrib/gcc/doc contrib/gcc/objc contrib/libobjc etc/mtree gnu/lib gnu/lib/libobjc gnu/usr.bin/cc gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1obj gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_tools gnu/usr.bin/cc/doc s... Message-ID: <BANLkTinh6X=Rzwokr3OMPo4k3=jOjkL47g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201104190840.29535.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201104172103.p3HL3Ntb049564@svn.freebsd.org> <4DAC8060.2070002@FreeBSD.org> <92422863-8655-4FDE-A1E9-5EE1F46DA5BC@bsdimp.com> <201104190840.29535.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Trimming since I have a mostly-unrelated question... On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 5:40 AM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Monday, April 18, 2011 3:59:45 pm Warner Losh wrote: >> In this case, there was a new kernel thing just after, so it turned out OK. >> But let's not gratuitously bump the version since the granularity we have >> already allows the ports to make good choices on when to leave something in or >> out. > > Except that that directly contradicts our previously established policy that > these version bumps are cheap and that we should do more of them (this came up > a few years ago when we changed the policy so that the new "stable" branch > after a release starts at N + 500 (e.g. 802500) rather than N + 100 to give > more room for version bumps on current). I thought I remembered reading (within the past 2 years) that __FreeBSD_version should not be incremented more than once a day, since there was a limit of 100 before the version minor number was affected. Did I get the polarity backwards and that was the old policy? Thanks, matthew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTinh6X=Rzwokr3OMPo4k3=jOjkL47g>