On 22.06.2017 21:56, Baho Utot wrote:
On 6/22/2017 11:30 AM, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote:
On 22.06.2017 21:26, Baho Utot wrote:
On 6/22/2017 10:03 AM, scratch65...@att.net wrote:
[Default] On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:18:56 +0200, Baptiste Daroussin
<b...@freebsd.org> wrote:
As usual with such proposal, where do you find the manpower to
handle the number
of branches required (the quarterly branches are already hard to
maintain, it is
only one branch).
Please help me out here, Baptiste, because I'm apparently missing
*something*.
Out in industry, if you haven't enough people to do a new
high-quality release every N months, and you can't get a
headcount increase, then you cut the release schedule. Can't do
4 releases a year? Cut back to 2. Still too many? Cut back to
1.
The alternatives to cutting the schedule are that (a) people
begin burning out and quitting, (b) quality drops and your
customer base begins abandoning you, or (c) both of the above.
Why don't the same choices apply here? What am I missing?
_______________________________________________
I am looking at OpenBSD to replace FreeBSD. They have a more relaxed
update schedule and that fits with what I need.
Go ahead with whatever fits your needs.
But since the ports-tree is a subversion repository it is really easy
to maintain the status you want. I do this for various customer and my
various server.
I am looking for a system that is very stable and doesn't do the
upgrade path for the sake of it being newer.
Which has various downsides. I remember for example various linux LTS
distros, which only apply security fixes. I discovered various bugs
which stay there for years, because they are not security issues -
they just hurt you daily. :D
No not really I ran LFS servers and desktops for 10 years
This does not mean that you're hit by the bugs i am. The most recent
example is a bug in curl parsing a #. This was introduced via a security
fix in Ubuntu and make use of '#' in passwords for htaccess impossible,
until you use new curl releases. Which are not available on Ubuntu 16
LTS for some more years.
Having a "releng ports" version that goes with a releng version of
the OS would be great by me. Linux from scratch does this and it
works very well.
It really does not work well. In everyday situation this results in
"heck we need a new server to get a new version of a needed software,
because we need a new linux version".
I regularly seeing admins setting up different Ubuntu versions,
because at one you have PHP 7 and on the other MySQL 5.7, but not both
at the same Ubuntu version.
BSD != Linux so your comparison is invalid.
No, that is the point of my comparison. Luckily BSD != Linux and also
the various distributions schemes of updates having there up- and downsides.
But in such discussions its often that only the own use-case is
mentioned. And i want to widen the scope.
Greetings,
Torsten
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
