From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 5 15:59:21 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2819A1065672 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:59:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=pschmehl_lists=0350784f4@tx.rr.com) Received: from ip-relay-001.utdallas.edu (ip-relay-001.utdallas.edu [129.110.20.111]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBB298FC23 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 15:59:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=pschmehl_lists=0350784f4@tx.rr.com) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,596,1204524000"; d="scan'208";a="1239104" Received: from smtp3.utdallas.edu ([129.110.20.110]) by ip-relay-001.utdallas.edu with ESMTP; 05 Jun 2008 10:30:44 -0500 Received: from utd65257.utdallas.edu (utd65257.utdallas.edu [129.110.3.28]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp3.utdallas.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 849D523DE3 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2008 10:30:44 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:30:44 -0500 From: Paul Schmehl To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20080605080344.f99347ec.torfinn.ingolfsen@broadpark.no> References: <458FE12C-AE4D-48F9-8193-4663079CEEF8@netconsonance.com> <84EBEA5D3A1F47E79E8E12C4CF4D0314@multiplay.co.uk> <20080605003545.GP89632@k7.mavetju> <13A3FC54-B459-48C5-85CD-14CC38913838@netconsonance.com> <20080605080344.f99347ec.torfinn.ingolfsen@broadpark.no> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.6 (Linux/x86) X-Munged-Reply-To: Figure it out MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Paul Schmehl List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:59:21 -0000 --On Thursday, June 05, 2008 08:03:44 +0200 Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote: > On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:19:03 -0700 > Jo Rhett wrote: > >> Edwin, I've been building testbed environments for over 20 years in >> my professional career. I know a lot more than this basic concept. >> >> The costs in our environment for a proper testbed is $20k in >> hardware and 3000 man hours. That's for a small test of comparable >> small changes to the existing environment. >> >> Why would we take on this cost only to re-document well known and >> already acknowledged bugs? I mean, really? > > I'm surprised that a test environment (for upgrade testing, load > testing, release testing) isn't already in place. > Some people (customers and operators alike) might think it is > unprofessional and unsafe to run a production system without a test > system available. > > If you have a test system available, why don't you use it? I am offended by the tone of many of the responses to Jo Rhett's *legitimate* arguments that *perhaps* the EOL of 6.2 is a bit premature. I think some folks need to take a break, push away from the keyboard and reduce the insulting rhetoric they are casting his way. He has been more than clear that he routinely donates time and equipment to the community. If all you can do is insult him, perhaps you should consider shutting up. Please note: this is *not* directed only at the person to whom I responded but to all those who have chosen to take the low road rather than engage Jo in professional discussion. -- Paul Schmehl As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer.