Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 18:34:07 +0200 From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> To: Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, re@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD flood of 8 breakage announcements in 3 mins. Message-ID: <201905151634.x4FGY7nR067982@fire.js.berklix.net> In-Reply-To: Your message "Wed, 15 May 2019 17:58:38 %2B0200." <20190515155838.GV20962@fc.opsec.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > > > > > Alternative is to for announcers to do Less work: > > > > Send each announcement when ready. > > > > The problem is not the announcement, the problem is providing > > > the freebsd-update. > > > > If announcements are send when ready, and the freebsd-update is > > > not ready, therefore, the timeframes to attack systems with unpatched > > > problems are much longer. > > > True as far as that goes for binary users, but often source patches > > are available faster, which begs the question: when to announce ? > > When there's diffs ? When diffs are commited to src/ (used to be the norm *) ? > > When there's some binary update ? > > Whne a whole bunch of 8 arrive in 3 minutes ? Gasp ! > > Now I understand why you bring this up. > > I guess the majority of users are using the binary update path. Hmm, a distinct possibility, that could be a problem delaying announcements. > Maybe re@ can explain how the process is for these steps ? I assumed re@ (periodicaly overworked team who presumably collapse in appreciated exhaustion after valuable work rolling releases), were [largely] different people? Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, Consultant Systems Engineer, BSD Linux Unix, Munich Aachen Kent http://stolenvotes.uk Brexit ref. stole votes from 700,000 Brits in EU. Lies bought; Groups fined; 1.9 M young had no vote, 1.3 M old leavers died.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201905151634.x4FGY7nR067982>