From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 10 22:27:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8896B16A407 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 22:27:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from volker@vwsoft.com) Received: from frontmail.ipactive.de (frontmail.ipactive.de [85.214.39.229]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA27843D66 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 22:27:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from volker@vwsoft.com) Received: from mail.vtec.ipme.de (gprs-pool-1-012.eplus-online.de [212.23.126.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by frontmail.ipactive.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8006333D21 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 00:26:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (cesar.sz.vwsoft.com [192.168.16.3]) by mail.vtec.ipme.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 429342E546 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 00:26:04 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <45049112.3@vwsoft.com> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 00:26:26 +0200 From: Volker User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <20060910035614.282CD16A58D@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20060910035614.282CD16A58D@hub.freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-VWSoft-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: volker@vwsoft.com X-ipactive-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ipactive-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ipactive-MailScanner-From: volker@vwsoft.com Subject: Re: ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?! X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 22:27:43 -0000 > This should be documented somewhere clearly then, as my understanding was that -STABLE meant that anything MFCd back to it *was* tested and deemed stable ... and yes, I do run stable, and yes, I do expect to hit the occasional 'oopses', but "blantant and obvious bugs due to insufficient testing", IMHO, doesn't classify as an 'oops' .... > Guys, we're talking about software. Have you ever seen a piece of software which has been really bug-free? Not the hello-world, I'm talking about real software. Also, you should never go with -STABLE on a production server. I'm sure this has been made clear in the handbook. If it's really a that import server in production use, go with a RELEASE. -STABLE is not a technology playground as CURRENT but should be seen as a BETA testing system. If that's not the case, then why use RELEASE at all? Sure you may blame a developer for not testing enough but you're on your own if you use beta quality software on your production systems. As a developer I've seen many bugs which haven't been found during testing and I know it's nearly impossible to find _all_ bugs while testing. I've seen applications failing just because the user typed the wrong key at the wrong time (or an unexpected key). As a user I'm thankful for bugs being fast fixed bugs but on the other side I really know what I'm doing when using -STABLE software on my system. I do see this as a give-back to the community to find bugs early before -RELEASE. Also keep in mind most kernel hackers do kernel hacking in their spare time. Everyone using FreeBSD (or any other OS system) is profiting from their spare time and it's unfair to be not that polite. And back to the issue: The gmirror bug has already been fixed and I posted a note to the ML hours before the first "who the f... did cause that bug" post. A short look into ML postings would have made this thread needless. If you blame developers, then please shut off your computer. my2ct Volker