Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 1 May 1999 08:09:03 +0100 (BST)
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        Kevin Day <toasty@home.dragondata.com>
Cc:        Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, david@aps-services.com, paul@originative.co.uk, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: solid NFS patch #6 avail for -current - need testers files)
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905010806210.59263-100000@herring.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <199904302208.RAA07422@home.dragondata.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, Kevin Day wrote:

> > > 
> > > To sum it all up is there any difference between the branches?
> > 
> > Yes.  We hope that people like you will help us by participating in the 
> > testing of potential releases _before_ they go out as releases, not 
> > _afterwards_.
> > 
> > Sitting around doing nothing and then complaining after the fact 
> > doesn't help anyone, least of all yourself.
> > 
> 
> This isn't meant in a bad way, but let me share with you my experiences.
> 
> Before 3.0 was released, I said several times "Hey, NFS got a lot worse on
> -CURRENT. Is anyone looking at this?" and got several replies of "Duh, this
> is -CURRENT. Don't whine about it. If you're trying to use this in a
> production environment, you're crazy."
> 
> After 3.0 was released, I said "Hey, 3.0 got released, and NFS was still
> broken", to which I got "Why didn't you bug us about this before the
> release?" and/or "Why didn't you test this before release?"
> 
> I understand NFS is a 'special' problem, but for those of us not in the
> trenches coding, I think the '3-level' system would be better. -CURRENT for
> those who are coding, -BETA for people like me to test things and bring up
> what broke, and -RELEASE for everyone else.
> 
> I honestly don't know when to bring up things like that, now. :)

I don't think a 3 branch system is workable for the simple reason that CVS
doesn't handle branches at all well. One possible alternative would be the
same structure that we have today with the addition of a 'last known good'
tag which is on the head branch and slides forward when a feature is
deemed 'good'. People who want features but don't want to fix them can
use this tag.

--
Doug Rabson				Mail:  dfr@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd.			Phone: +44 181 442 9037




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9905010806210.59263-100000>