From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Jun 22 14:05:24 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848DBD8CF6B for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:05:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 661B07C368 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:05:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 627B3D8CF6A; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:05:24 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 603FED8CF69 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:05:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) Received: from nm2-vm10.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm2-vm10.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.114.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CEFC7C367 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:05:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1498140204; bh=IIQyIe3S+owQQPd0Sm1xJ81ycmNRbxubuuFeOMoeFVY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=I26ryp3Cc6lpx7mgkOmjlUdDr0Y2zAy9gf04HfnbhZjLy6Urihh3swwDOsfnuj68N5U5Qr6n/OSgWqxvdy3wnZvcl8TILMbGahQdEedTswk24q8ljlzSd+DE4Xvkm7jFYuzwRJ+qy42g8Z/I289A4TNM4bkA3cLn/9nloVm1Xt8= Received: from [66.196.81.164] by nm2.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Jun 2017 14:03:24 -0000 Received: from [98.139.221.158] by tm10.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Jun 2017 14:03:24 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp118.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Jun 2017 14:03:24 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 707984.54945.bm@smtp118.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: 9Q0C8jAVM1mlPOPHFT3LmoH97fRU488cLIu5lfJMDCNpnzI OOxRMayE2OFXa_wtZN0oS7Uo6pO3Q4giSI3lVqixBkGhltOCWE0lXHSNH0Hf rvgxZX7a8jS9Uu0hjLUaYJGLmOpZQ1_dJTNY2JbsUfBR6b6kC4ALqpUpvbJE SwnIpewXdqMAovclmfd2iVLldgsvFIwqiy6aq9gMpdoVf8yCG4G_Hidrzmax EvY0ACcg98BrHN1oIOrQ8e1mmKWiqzyZyYtPpbtStVQOcMuH3e2JCNHzQBSL dUpQ8A7DsK9pxLcqtEomYAKoXk5_A9dvZcOATAgQH75I00Se6EziX0nh3e60 AcBmxCGNb6PhiZBAAzHieCF6Y9f.1u_PCFgPWrk3zj7Em0NF1JD_Nsq5tsoW .8kICqeTct6rMyVj62qL25GcD5ZFvdv_IDLZ6OyMYFbgGDlxQqfQvWi_mZj6 7gmqcoiv.IIrNIy3P4W3CMRwuR42CgUJbPtW68dCqOIMaiz_YVPwPCKDfEOW ON.qRTn9SkpObzLliI4PFlAdn_p8an.bx04pZuMZv3A9f93CjZBhTtQ-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: pPvqnOaswBBbYZLVYFzvU7GaowLcbNioPp.aF8KvOjZk From: To: freebsd-ports Subject: Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:03:33 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20170622121856.haikphjpvr6ofxn3@ivaldir.net> In-Reply-To: <20170622121856.haikphjpvr6ofxn3@ivaldir.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:05:24 -0000 [Default] On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:18:56 +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >As usual with such proposal, where do you find the manpower to handle the number >of branches required (the quarterly branches are already hard to maintain, it is >only one branch). Please help me out here, Baptiste, because I'm apparently missing *something*. Out in industry, if you haven't enough people to do a new high-quality release every N months, and you can't get a headcount increase, then you cut the release schedule. Can't do 4 releases a year? Cut back to 2. Still too many? Cut back to 1. The alternatives to cutting the schedule are that (a) people begin burning out and quitting, (b) quality drops and your customer base begins abandoning you, or (c) both of the above. Why don't the same choices apply here? What am I missing?