Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 02:15:49 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: julian@elischer.org Cc: drosih@rpi.edu Subject: Re: if_data size issues Message-ID: <20040902.021549.54181743.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4136D0A4.9000407@elischer.org> References: <p06110439bd5c29e42719@[128.113.24.47]> <20040902051415.GA23926@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <4136D0A4.9000407@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <4136D0A4.9000407@elischer.org>
Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> writes:
: yes I believe 5.2->6.0-current@X
: where X is a point in time a bit down the road, is not an important
: conversion, as very few people will be doing it...
: those who are running 5.2 will probably jump to either 5.3 or 6.0
: within a relatively short time.
The current plans for the rest of the build system is to support 5.2
(or maybe 5.1) -> 6-CURRENT upgrades. This is a larger window than we
had for the 5-current branch (which was 4 branchpoint -> current), but
seems like a reasonable compromise. In the past, when core and
non-core discussions of this have come up, stable branchpoint ->
current was the compromise window of upgrade path that would be
allowed in the tree to balance the needs of the users to upgrade, with
the needs of the developers to do spring cleaning. There is much
history of discussions here, and much behind the scenes negotiation to
reach this compromise.
: those who go to 6 from 4 will probably go to 4.11 or more or 5.3+ first.
4.x -> 6-current will need to go through 5.x (x >= 2) after 5.3 is
released.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040902.021549.54181743.imp>