FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle

[Igor Mozolevsky]

On 18 January 2012 17:56, Andriy Gapon <avg at freebsd.org> wrote:
> on 18/01/2012 19:13 Daniel Eischen said the following:
>> "someone who owns a branch..." - If you cut release N.0, do not
>> move -current to N+1.  Keep -current at N for a while, prohibiting
>> ABI changes, and any other risky changes.  If a developer wants to
>> do possibly disruptive work, they can do it from their own repo.
>
> I am totally against this.

I was thinking about this and I'm with Andriy on this: such solution
has no long term potential and will only serve to stagnate the
innovation. This has been repeated over and over in this thread, but
it's worth another mention, currently, there are effectively four
tracks: 7.4, 8.2, 9.0 and -HEAD, which understandably poses a lot of
difficulty for in terms of maintenance. Whatever historical reason for
that is, I think a lot of people would agree that this needs changing
in the near future to have a single -RELEASE branch and a single -HEAD
branch, but with the understanding by the devs that just because
-RELEASE has been cut, it doesn't mean that everyone, en mass, drops
development on that and hops on the -HEAD bandwagon...

--
Igor M.