From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 23 20:39:15 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ED231065679 for ; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 20:39:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A221F8FC27 for ; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 20:39:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 8680 invoked by uid 399); 23 Dec 2008 20:12:32 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO lap.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 23 Dec 2008 20:12:32 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4951462C.9080702@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 12:12:28 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081128) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sam Leffler References: <20081222214010.GA18389@elvis.mu.org> <20081223162336.GA77652@rink.nu> <20081223163739.GF42864@freebie.xs4all.nl> <495124E0.4090108@freebsd.org> <554D5F07-3108-45EB-AE9A-B177E79B0964@elvandar.org> <495141BA.9010208@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <495141BA.9010208@freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 OpenPGP: id=D5B2F0FB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP usb2 (usb4bsd) to become default in 2 weeks. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 20:39:15 -0000 Sam Leffler wrote: > I'll offer a different POV. I think we should switch ASAP and resolve > open issues (so long as the old code is kept around for folks to fall > back on). We cannot ship 8.0 w/ 2 stacks and delaying the inevitable > will only leave unknown issues closer to the release date and > potentially delay/extend the release process. I agree with Sam completely on this point. While I think that the semi-recent move to a model of -current being "stable" (in the sense of compiles/runs almost all of the time) is a welcome one, I think that there are times when we need to bite the bullet and move forward. Whatever issues that remain in the new code will not get fixed faster by delaying the switch. The fact that the old stack will remain as an option for those who absolutely must have it makes this decision a no-brainer. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection