From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 10 01:54:14 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E29B91065670; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 01:54:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (lefty.soaustin.net [66.135.55.46]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFA848FC14; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 01:54:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 11BB48C074; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 20:38:10 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 20:38:10 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: Steve Kargl Message-ID: <20090310013810.GC22633@lonesome.com> References: <200903091922.n29JMjLR035306@svn.freebsd.org> <20090309194338.GA48593@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20090309195805.GA53225@citylink.fud.org.nz> <20090309222705.GA49870@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090309222705.GA49870@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: Stanislav Sedov , svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Andrew Thompson Subject: Re: svn commit: r189594 - head X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 01:54:15 -0000 On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 03:27:05PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > When Mark Linimon, a member of portmgr, posts on Feb 26th > > (http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2009-February/053282.html > > There appears to be a disconnect with USB2 development and the > rest of FreeBSD. Within 2 days after posting that, we had a list created of all the ports the ports that were broken by known commits to -current, and people started working through them. I am very encouraged by the response. In theory, there would be enough volunteers and spare machines to regression-test every change that might be disruptive before commit. In practice, it's simply not possible. As it is, since 7.1 went out the door we (portmgr) have been continually running -exp runs to try to work through our backlog. We have several more in the queue that are also high priority. (In particular, we spent time on the xorg upgrade, which we knew would affect all users, not just -current). I suppose portmgr could have objected to the merge -- but note, it had been in the planning stage for quite some time, and the window to get this massive change into the src base before 8.0 was starting to close. Now that the commit has gone in, all we can do is ask people to help in fixing problems. In this, I think we could hardly have done better. As mlaier has pointed out, -current has sharp edges. It's one of 3 choices open to you, the other two being -stable (which will still have ports regressions from time to time -- see xorg -- and sometimes even src regressions), and a release, which is the best we can do with respect to QA. If you can't deal with having your system out of commission on occasion, then -current isn't for you. mcl