Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 00:01:30 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Schedule for releases Message-ID: <20101229000130.000052f4@unknown> In-Reply-To: <20101227131140.H6126@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <DB4D8AC7-25D6-4901-BBF9-77BEB956840B@cederstrand.dk> <201012220852.oBM8q2Qi039123@lurza.secnetix.de> <20101222123834.GN23098@acme.spoerlein.net> <20101227131140.H6126@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 14:47:32 +0000 (UTC) "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> wrote: > On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, Ulrich Sp=F6rlein wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > > I think this is the core "problem". Statistics[1] show, that most > > developers run some form of -CURRENT and > ... > > [1] I just made this statistic up. >=20 > and I think you are just plain wrong here. Seriously I would bet that > >75% of the developers do not run some sort of head for their > day-to-day work. They might use it for compile (and boot and maybe > sometimes even some more) testing, they might run it in a VM, or a lab > machine but not on their servers, not on their notebooks and not on > their desktops they work with daily (and neither would I expect most > consumers of FreeBSD unfortunately). You can count me as one of those which run (more or less) HEAD on his server and (mostly unused) desktop at home. > I am still not convinced that whatever development model people and > companies use (and I heard of in here) is better than to just devel > on HEAD and if it works there merge it and backport it to your release > branch for QA and shipping. It may not be a problem for developers which know enough about FreeBSD, but try to sell this to people which do not know enough about FreeBSD or some management-people (and I'm not talking about the money-argument here). > We still lack the parts that would tell us something in the last week > or last 24 hours caused a regression that made my TCP/NFS/ZFS/UFS/<you > name it> n% slower. Kris had been doing a good job in the past but as > time shows we need more people, different setups, ... We do not lack the parts, we lack someone to take the parts and get them up and running. See: http://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-performance@freebsd.org/msg02819.html http://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-performance@freebsd.org/msg02821.html > It's not only "compiles", "boots", but also the formerly in this > thread mentioned "works correctly" and in addition to that the "works > well as expected" or "works better than before" - hopefully;). Maybe this could also be used to run the regression tests as one of the benchmarks. If yes: As Robert mentioned, we can not go and tell to run them all in one command (ATM), but we could have each of them as a different benchmark. Bye, Alexander.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101229000130.000052f4>