Re: Latest and quarterly best practices

Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp> writes:

> On Sat, 13 Jan 2024 02:52:18 +0100
> Jan Beich <jbeich@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>
>> Jose Quinteiro <freebsd@quinteiro.org> writes:
>> 
>> > Maybe there are some ports that should not exist in the quarterly
>> > branch? Looks like some of these are under such heavy development that
>> > they really don't have a stable version.
>> 
>> Hyprland release cadence is similar to Chromium and Firefox.
>
> Not using/checking hyprland, but at least updates for Chromium and
> Firefox almost always contain security fixes. So they should be MFH'ed
> to quarterly ASAP, although it's quite often and heavily-loaded.
>
> Stricly speaking, quarterly should only get "security updates", but for
> too large projects like Chromium and Firefox, backporting security
> fixes only should not be realistic and whole bunch of updates are
> introduced. This is just a my guess.

MFH is ports/ equivalent of MFC in src/, so not limited[1] to security.
src/ regularly MFC *new* features[2] because POLA and ABI primarily
concerns with *existing* features - one can't break what previously
didn't exist. src/ is also better at splitting changes into atomic bits,
so individual commits are easy to assess the risk of and MFC.

[1] https://wiki.freebsd.org/Ports/QuarterlyBranch#Aims
    https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-announce/2014-April/000079.html
[2] Ignore OpenZFS imports, Clang upgrades, LinuxKPI rebases, driver updates, etc
    For example, FreeBSD 13.2 adds wg(4) and netlink(4) that weren't in 13.1.