On 24 aug 2012, at 15.50, Sascha Wildner wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:53:33 +0200, John Marino <dragonfly...@marino.st> > wrote: > >> I suspect there are still recent kernel changes that need to be backported >> to 3.0.3 before a release, specially this pmap/wirecount work which is >> ongoing. What's the intent of tagging at there? to make a release at that >> point? > > Justin wrote it: > >> On 8/24/2012 03:53, Justin Sherrill wrote: >>> [...] >>> as several people have pointed out, it's overdue. > > Our last release ISO (3.0.2) is now _5 months_ old and has all of the almost > 100 issues listed in the tagging message. Just one example, no one can > install DragonFly 3.0 on a >2TB disk using the installer. Even without > installer, if the install goes to a AHCI attached disk (which are the > majority, I suspect), it's limited to 2TB. > > The point is (and it's been pointed out already AFAIR), minor releases are as > good (or bad, if you will) as the previous minor release, but certainly not > worse, as we just MFC bug fixes. So a large number of bugs fixed justifies > rolling a new minor release. There are users which have a benefit from it > (see >2TB disk issue). > > Minor releases should be in regular intervals, if enough fixes have > accumulated and they should not be blocked by any "show stopper" or "blocker" > issues, as these issues are present in the previous minor release as well, so > I don't see what's wrong with replacing an ISO that has bugs with a newer ISO > that has fewer bugs (which is really all that we are arguing about here). > > Can we please leave this "show stopping" to our major releases instead of > bickering over the minor ones?
I agree here. We should put out a fresh minor release as soon as possible. A few fixes are better than none. However, I do think the wire count panic should be fixed for next major release... Max
