Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 12:32:45 -0400 From: <scratch65535@att.net> To: freebsd-ports <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version Message-ID: <4jrnkcpurfmojfdnglqg5f97sohcuv56sv@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <20170622141644.yadxdubynuhzygcy@ivaldir.net> References: <CAO%2BPfDeFz1JeSwU3f21Waz3nT2LTSDAvD%2B8MSPRCzgM_0pKGnA@mail.gmail.com> <20170622121856.haikphjpvr6ofxn3@ivaldir.net> <dahnkctsm1elbaqlarl8b9euouaplqk2tv@4ax.com> <20170622141644.yadxdubynuhzygcy@ivaldir.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Default] On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:16:44 +0200, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >The model with one branch per release will bring it to way more with a >maintenance window way larger It would indeed! Factor of 3, I think. But I'm really not suggesting that, I'm suggesting that a better schedule would be one ports release for v10, one for v11, one for v12, etc. It could be done for n.0 or any of the others. Were it my decision, I'd probably go for n.1, since there might be fewer bugs than in n.0, but the difference might not be significant. My problem is that my industry experience tells me that reducing the frequency of port releases is practically *guaranteed* to be a Really Good Thing for everyone. Yet apparently you and others on the dev team don't like the idea, and no matter how I much I think about it, I haven't been able to understand why you don't. 's mise le meas
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4jrnkcpurfmojfdnglqg5f97sohcuv56sv>