Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:04:50 +0100 From: Daniel Gerzo <danger@freebsd.org> To: <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle Message-ID: <e23eba16dcf4418e8d2961655102cedf@rulez.sk> In-Reply-To: <570E1AEB-F0C5-4286-BF10-56D509D33473@kientzle.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1112211415580.19710@kozubik.com> <1326756727.23485.10.camel@Arawn> <4F14BAA7.9070707@freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201181034580.51158@fledge.watson.org> <570E1AEB-F0C5-4286-BF10-56D509D33473@kientzle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:54:44 -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: > On Jan 18, 2012, at 2:44 AM, Robert Watson wrote: >> >> ... perhaps what is really called for is breaking out our .0 release >> engineering entirely from .x engineering, with freebsd-update being in >> the latter. > > This is a great idea! > > In particular, it would allow more people to be involved. I like this idea too. In a summary to this thread, I'd say that people would love to see: - more regular minor releases, e.g. 8.3, 8.4 say every 4 months (3x per year) - have max. 2 -STABLE branches under support at any given time (once a new -STABLE is created, EOL the oldest supported branch; in a result we would release major version a bit less often. However 5 years between mayor releases is too much and that would only stagnate the development and make switching between mayor releases much more difficult) - make X.Y.Z releases more common or issue Errata notices for existing minor releases more often. I can easily imagine us fixing much more bugs by Errata notices than we do now. How much work is behind issuing an errata notice? - an idea from this thread that I liked is to allow people to cherry-pick the patch level (-pX) which would be great if we managed to release more errata notices. -- Kind regards Daniel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?e23eba16dcf4418e8d2961655102cedf>