From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Dec 13 23:50:39 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA18380 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 23:50:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18374 for ; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 23:50:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id XAA15093; Sat, 13 Dec 1997 23:49:59 -0800 (PST) To: Luigi Rizzo cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposed code merge, objections? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 14 Dec 1997 06:53:01 +0100." <199712140553.GAA01161@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 23:49:59 -0800 Message-ID: <15089.882085799@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > So to put things differently, what is the policy to move features > from -current to -stable ? Unfortunately we don't have a port > category for kernel enhancements, maybe we should add one. After they've been well-tested, both in -current and in the committer's private 2.2 sources, they can go across just so long as they do not also constitute a signficant risk to functionality in other areas of the system. In the specific case of audio support, this means that it can migrate across no problem just so long as you don't break anything else in the 2.2 kernel in the process. :) Jordan