Re: backporting changes from 6.x to 5.x
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 02:47:07PM +0100, Petr Salinger wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Aurelien asked me about backporting recent changes from 6.x to 5.x. My opinion
> > is that in order to preserve 5.x package stability (remember that some people is
> > using it in production environment), we should be very conservative about this
> > branch, and always use 6.x (or later) for new features/hacks/etc.
>
> May be also decent attempt on amd64 ?
I don't think that'd be useful. By the time kfreebsd-amd64 is usable, 5.x will
be dead upstream already.
> On the other hand, given upstream schedule,
> it might be better to focus on stabilizing FreeBSD 6.x
> and use it for both i386 and amd64 in near future.
OTOH, 5.x is still supported by upstream, and it's probably the best stability
we can provide. I think we should follow the rest of debian in being
conservative about kernel versions in release.
If people want 6.x for better performance or for a new feature, they can install
with 5.x default and upgrade. But if people have problems with 6.x in default
install maybe they're unable to downgrade.
> Jan 30: Freeze RELENG_5 and RELENG_6
> Mar 20: Release FreeBSD 6.1
> Apr 3: Release FreeBSD 5.5
> Jun 12: Freeze RELENG_6
> Jul 31: Release FreeBSD 6.2
> Oct 23: Freeze RELENG_6
> Dec 11: Release FreeBSD 6.3
It's hard to make predictions, but I think 5.5 will be supported by upstream by
the time we release with etch.
> BTW, what to do with mailing lists usage
> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2006/02/msg00113.html)
> Swap them, leave it as is ?
Aurelien said (via IRC) he'd move the logs to a separate list this weekend.
--
Robert Millan
Reply to: