From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Aug  5 01:03:58 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA28166
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 01:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA28150
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 01:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id BAA09350; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 01:02:53 -0700 (PDT)
To: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
cc: helbig@MX.BA-Stuttgart.De, andreas@klemm.gtn.com, current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Current is currently really a mess (was: Re: Tk/Tcl broken(?)) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 05 Aug 1997 00:47:56 PDT."
             <199708050747.AAA15842@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> 
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 01:02:53 -0700
Message-ID: <9346.870768173@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> One thing to note is that I'm not supervising a group of people hired
> to do ports work from 9 to 5.  It's not like I can yell "Ok guys!  No
> more -stable work!  Go convert your machines to -current!  Now fix the
> bugs!".  The porters have their machines to work on, and they are
> either -stable or -current (and it seems we have a pretty good balance
> now).  So it's actually EASIER to work on both branches, and to make
> sure things don't get entirely out of track wrt -current.

Maybe we should start hiring people. :-)

> Excuse me, but I have been supporting the 2.2.x folks from the very
> beginning, and will continue to do so.  I learned the lesson in the
> 2.1.x fiasco.  We should never have planned to release a new version
> without updating ports and packages.  (We realized that when 2.1.5
> went out, but by then it was too late to resync....)

Sorry for the misinformation then.  I guess I failed to take into
account the fact that even though you don't commit stuff onto that
*branch*, you're still #ifdef'ing things so that they work in both
environments.  Is that a fair summary?

> With the same argument about -current moving faster and faster, it's
> going to be harder and harder to catch the longer we let it run ahead
> of us.

Well, I'm open to suggestions. :-)

				Jordan