Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:17:00 +0200 From: Carlo Strub <cs@FreeBSD.org> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, danfe@FreeBSD.org, bdrewery@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: quarterly branches and transition to post-pkg_* [was: svn commit: r364739 - in head: . sysutils sysu [...] Message-ID: <1408090620.414581.688603339.133023.2@c-st.net> In-Reply-To: <53EDA67E.7090206@marino.st> References: <53EDA67E.7090206@marino.st> <53ea6d76.6eb9.5599e7c9@svn.freebsd.org> <53EA6EBB.2010802@marino.st> <53EA7155.4060606@FreeBSD.org> <53EA7416.5080008@marino.st> <88E432AA-8DC7-4C8A-B530-C75AF32952AF@adamw.org> <20140813074515.GB16368@FreeBSD.org> <53EB19F9.4040803@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
15/08/2014 08:22 - John Marino wrote: > On 8/13/2014 09:55, John Marino wrote: > > On 8/13/2014 09:45, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > >> [*] Well, there are quarterly branches if one wants it to feel like De= bian > >> stable without the quality control; IMHO they are of no use and sh= ould > >> be ignored altogether. > >=20 > >=20 > > In concept the quarterly branches are a good idea. Execution is a > > different matter. > >=20 > > #1 issue: There's no portsnap with quarterly branches > > #2 issue: backporting fixes to quarterly branch, the process is a PITA > > #3 issue: There's no basic integrity check (e.g. freeze) before branchi= ng > >=20 > >=20 > > We have a huge problem looming: The pkg_* tools are going to be removed, > > maybe as soon as 1 September. > >=20 > > I think the following should happen: > > 1) A version of portsnap be modified and added to the ports tree before > > then, a version that is quarter-branch capable > > 2) Waiting until 2014Q4 before removing pkg_* tools, which means at > > least wait until Oct 1. > > 3) Encourage everyone that has no intention to move to pkgng immediately > > to switch to the 2014Q4 branch > > 4) Maintain security updates to 2014Q4 branch for 6 months instead of > > the normal 3 months > > 5) Get the updated portsnap into base > >=20 > > And eventually make quarterly branches the norm and working on head "at > > your own risk". > >=20 > >=20 > > Right now I see no plan for the post-pkg_* transition and the absence of > > one is pretty scary. You guys should consider my proposal above or > > something similar. > >=20 > >=20 > > John >=20 > Should I re-post this in developers@? > Or does everyone think providing an outlet for those that can't adjust > to pkg_* tools removal by 1 Sept is unnecessary? >=20 > John >=20 >=20 >=20 I agree on one thing with the poster: it would be nice to have portsnap doi= ng also quarterly branches. Apart from that, I think the current set-up is = very good and, honestly, patching a quarterly branch is easy (for those who= don't know yet, please use the script in Tools). Carlo=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1408090620.414581.688603339.133023.2>