Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 07:32:33 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: "Richard Seaman, Jr." <lists@tar.com> Cc: "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Current is currently really a mess (was: Re: Tk/Tcl broken(?)) Message-ID: <906.870705153@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 03 Aug 1997 16:41:50 CDT." <199708032141.QAA19564@ns.tar.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Hope you all don't mind a few comments from someone who is just > a lowly "user". I don't make such distinctions - it's the quality of what you have to say that's important. :) > This doesn't mean that "ports" have to support both -current and the > 2.2 branch. But, I'd feel a lot better about being committed to > FreeBSD if I thought the core group placed the importance of the > "ports" collection as a lot more than "that extra 10%". I'm sorry I gave the impression that the ports collection had such an overal level of importance - it's far more important than that. I was simply trying to say that for people on the "bleeding edge", it's less important than technical progress and testing of new features. For those on the current release branch (RELENG_2_2 at the moment), it's of far greater importance and that was merely my point. > 2) I noticed that certain bug fixes were made more readily in -current > than in 2.2. For example, you dropped kernel ppp out the the GENERIC > kernel. So, when I was running 2.2 I tried switching to user ppp. > Immediately I encountered bugs. Where did the bug fixes go? -current, > not 2.2, till much later. This is probably a failure of implementation more than a failure of policy. Things tend to propagate from one branch to another in fits and starts, e.g. somebody decides to go on a merge quest one day and brings a number of tested features in at once. I'd like it to happen a little more regularly and often, but time is not always a plentiful commodity and we have to make due with what we have. If there's some specific feature that you need in 2.2 (and I direct this at everyone), speak up! Chances are that there's no technical problem with integrating it, it's just buried in someone's TODO list or not even there at all. I typically merge by inspecting diffs between the two branches, a long and painful process which I and others tend to want to do only infrequently, so if you want something sooner rather than later it may be a simple matter of asking that it be done as a more specific task. Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?906.870705153>