From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 13 07:08:17 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 526E8106566B for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 07:08:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: from mail-we0-f182.google.com (mail-we0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0998FC0C for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 07:08:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werg1 with SMTP id g1so304696wer.13 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:08:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=GnU2m9Epn8tmjDhJfLOnqKJbkOU1+/O3t5o9cM5iAw4=; b=jYWs4i8mpR2T0gT2L+AB3jWRjLzHpwzEYKgvoHWVdJaM4T5yHtUou94TIlZQT8Nds2 vXucG+oewNSM1nL7PEhY+lg5JIjtD0CLPRQWrkFFiw2G8SQd3ShhiPtv2jfo7jJxxVnF 9yDLPaf195SRum1ZYTt7NLVv8XbaWzILKmjMDCs/MMy3LdHsP26SpCfAr1XZcrKp0xHk XHc5dMPCyhzt1BKAHsHZXheCbMcuUvOiGghFx3C7GAjYDPxqNCHWgxybq7gr0WANFeAS wZuR3yPJDX2l8/NfquJcvIjNQ3uRPk7BJAUxiARjPirIjKWoWe4yUQzBwIzgxpKxjJMD 6MQw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.207.27 with SMTP id m27mr9924087weo.42.1339571293882; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.7.105 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 03:08:12 -0400 Message-ID: From: grarpamp To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Many open branches = excess FreeBSD project work? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 07:08:17 -0000 We talk about release dates and always slippage and effect on downstream in other thread. But maybe some causes and even just related efficiency thing is: FreeBSD officially maintaining right now [1]: - G HEAD - G RELENG_9 - S RELENG_9_0 - G RELENG_8 - S RELENG_8_3 - S RELENG_8_2 - S RELENG_8_1 - G RELENG_7 - S RELENG_7_4 Woah!?!? Seem a lot of [G]eneral dev and [S]ecurity branches open at once. It seem crazy, and much extra work for whole FreeBSD project. Maybe some ways out there to reduce number of open trees/work? And enhance quality of releases or something in result. Suggest maybe making just two rolling RELENG (features, stable). Features be good for adopters and fine polishing post dev teams. Stable be amazing good production quality all downstream want. Then short live security/bug (only maintain till next from branch) releases from both (these be the formal releases). Focus be on quality level and first row left to right movement (timing) of feature sets. Second row past Xs1 be just closed snaps in time. HEAD -> Features ----------> Stable +- Fs1 x Fs2 x Fs3 +- Ss1 x Ss2 x Ss3 Similar to: Do a horizontal collapse two below rows into formal branches... 2.2.x, 4.x, 8.x = good (stable) other branch.x = intermediate, not maintain worthy (features) Today FreeBSD think it have to maintain nine trains (aka: rly, wtf)? I say with some focus tuning tomorrow it does not :) And just document another project ways (not make any imply from it): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7pkyDUX5uM [1] http://www.freebsd.org/releng/index.html