On 16 July 2012 19:33, Trent Nelson <[email protected]> wrote: > > There are currently no automated MFC systems in place, correct? I.e. the > onus is completely on the developer that made the change to head to merge > back to stable?
Correct. > Do the RELENG team do anything in particular to check > that changes for MFC actually make it back to stable? As far as I am aware, they do not. > Reason for asking, I noticed a bit of disparity between dev/isp between > head and stable/9: > ... > I'm currently running a local tree with those revs merged in manually > (simply via `svn merge svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/dev/isp .` in > /usr/src/sys/dev/isp), but it'd be nice to get them into 9.1, as they're > all past their recommend soak time (except for that last one, which is a > typo fix). We are currently in a code freeze for 9.1 so no unapproved MFCs may be committed. > Anyway, that got me thinking about the MFC process, especially leading up > to another release, hence this e-mail. What's the preferred way for > non-committers to bring outstanding MFCs to the attention of committers? Exactly the way you did it here: a polite email. :) -- Eitan Adler _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
