Jo Rhett wrote:
Because frankly we're going to be forced to run our own internal release management process instead. I guess this is not surprising, as this appears to be what every other business using significant amounts of freebsd in production are doing today.
I'm afraid you've hit the nail on the head. Stable, Current, these words mean nothing to me anymore, I'm using 8-CURRENT to get stable ZFS with the ata driver from 7 (because 8's doesn't work), and the old BTX loader because the new one locks up on all my newer hardware.
Then there's the bag of patches I am now carrying around from release to release, some for bug fixes and some for feature enhancements, none of which are in the base system for whatever reason.
I think FreeBSD is getting in a difficult position now because there's so much cool new stuff being shoe-horned in, but without the necessary volume of contributors to back it up with testing and bug fixes.
There's some truth to what you say, in that I would love to be directly contributing to the FreeBSD effort but instead I feel I'm running around putting out little fires all the time. Plus this era of 4 to 8 CPU cores has meant I am seeing bugs that are difficult to pin down and only occur under production load.
- Andrew _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
