From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 15 15:49:32 2004 Return-Path: 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 6343316A4CE; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 15:49:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C89E943D31; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 15:49:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from interjet.elischer.org ([24.7.73.28]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <20040415224930011009c91se>; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 22:49:31 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA52960; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 15:49:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 15:49:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Jon Noack In-Reply-To: <407EEB09.7080302@alumni.rice.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: Robert Watson cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: release-engineering branches (was Re: kernel panic in if_ppp.c) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 22:49:32 -0000 On Thu, 15 Apr 2004, Jon Noack wrote: > On 4/15/2004 2:13 PM, Robert Watson wrote: > > Currently, this fix doesn't fit the charter for the RELENG_5_2 branch, > > which is focussed on security-only fixes. However, there's an on-going > > discussion of broadening the scope of the current security branches to > > release-engineering branches. If this happens, I'll merge it to that > > branch also (feel free to remind me if I forget :-). > > This is a fabulous idea. I know it means a little more work, but I can > think of several situations where I had to manually patch a release > branch (or run -STABLE or -CURRENT) because I needed a simple bugfix. > Broadening the scope to make them release-engineering branches would > have saved me from this extra work. I think it increases the > "durability" of releases, allowing people to more strictly use just > releases. As a person responsible for FreeBSD machines in production, I > find this highly desirable. I can see definite complications (like the > MFC rules for the branch -- recent changes in commit permissions to > require an "Approved by:" line should help, though), but my opinion is > that this is worthwhile. yes I've been pushing for this, as I am also reponsible for production machines.. (about a thousand of them) We currently keep a separate cvs repository of 'patches' and added files that we apply automatically when we make our system images.. but it's a lot of work for p[eople just getting started to set that sort of infrastructure up. > > Jon Noack > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >