Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 18:30:05 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Idea: entries in UPDATING for each release Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1009281816490.1342@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <20100928235321.GB93659@atarininja.org> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1009281157040.99985@wonkity.com> <20100928235321.GB93659@atarininja.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010, Wesley Shields wrote: > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:07:08PM -0600, Warren Block wrote: >> Right now, people who install ports from a -release CD and then start >> upgrading don't have a clear marker for how far back to go in UPDATING. >> >> A simple entry would be enough: >> >> 20100703: >> AFFECTS: >> AUTHOR: >> >> FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE >> >> Not sure what AFFECTS should say. There might be other useful >> information that could be included in the note. Comments? > > I'm certainly not opposed to the idea but what exactly do we use for a > date? When the tree is tagged? When the release media is finalized and > published to mirrors? What about tag slippage? Do we account for that? It's probably not too critical as long as the note is before the post-release thaw and subsequent major updates. The existing UPDATING around the time of 8.1-RELEASE has entries for 20100626 and then 20100715. It was eleven days after 8.1-RELEASE that the next note was added, so at least for that example, timing isn't very tight. > If the only goal is to get a rough idea of when a release was cut then > either when the tree is tagged or when the media is pushed out to > mirrors is probably sufficient. Sounds fine.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1009281816490.1342>