From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 16 09:17:14 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C150F16A41F for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:17:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6164B43D53 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:17:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 92321 invoked by uid 399); 16 Dec 2005 09:17:12 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 Dec 2005 09:17:12 -0000 Message-ID: <43A28616.8010900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 01:17:10 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051203) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gary Kline References: <43A266E5.3080103@samsco.org> <20051216082704.GA52634@thought.org> In-Reply-To: <20051216082704.GA52634@thought.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: stable@freebsd.org, current Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Release schedule for 2006 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:17:14 -0000 Gary Kline wrote: > Sounds like an ambitious schedule... All my FBSD servers > are at least up to 5.3; my laptop is happy at 5.4. I have > what I believe to be a rationalquestion. Why should I go > beyond v5.5? There is one school of thought that says you shouldn't. If it works for you, there is no real need to upgrade. > More to the point, why can't minor security > tweaks be maintained indefinitely for 5.5? We don't support any branch of FreeBSD indefinitely. > What will > releases -6 and -7 offer that can;t reasonably be dropped > into -5? New features that require protocol/ABI changes, etc. for one. For example, I'm working on adding ports/local rc.d scripts to the overall rcorder, and that change won't go back into RELENG_5 because it constitutes a major paradigm shift, and we don't mess with -stable branches in that way. hth, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection