If OI is to follow FreeBSD's engineering releases, which I think is optimal,
then for example:
OI 152a1 would be qualified as a -current because it is experimental and will
be the next major branch. Or this could be 160a1, but I'm not sure there is
any new development in OI that would qualify for such a large change.
OI 151a8 would be qualified as the next -stable (/dev repo) because it is in
the 151 branch of releases. What goes into here is for the next minor release.
FreeBSD 9.x branch gets 9.1, 9.2, etc.
OI 151r1 would be the first -release of the 151a7 -stable.
But is there enough of a development staff to maintain something like this?
Apparently, /experimental, /dev, and the never released foreverware was
supposed to be this model, but it fell through. If there isn't staff
available, then maybe /dev should stay that way "forever" and just keep getting
bumped to a8, a9, a10, etc., and /hipster can stay out there for those who
prefer to track that repo.
I wouldn't see a problem for this aforementioned because as I mentioned, there
won't likely be any new technologies added to OI, such as, ZFS encryption that
would say "bump me to a 152 release."
________________________________
From: Christopher Chan <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: [oi-dev] Release engineering // planing
samba needs to be updated from 3.5.8 before it can be considered good enough
for /release.
On Friday, July 12, 2013 09:47 PM, ken mays wrote:
Good points. So, a major question: Is /dev good enough for /release promotion?
>Any known or reported issues to resolve beforehand?
>~ Ken Mays
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: G B <[email protected]>;
>To: OpenIndiana Developer mailing list <[email protected]>;
>Subject: Re: [oi-dev] Release engineering // planing
>Sent: Fri, Jul 12, 2013 11:49:21 AM
>
>
>/hipster should be the -current like FreeBSD
>/dev should be -stable like FreeBSD
>/release or /stable should be -RELEASE like
FreeBSD
>
>/hipster can keep having its breakage, that is
fine. But what I'd see is /dev get illumos-gate
updates and tested and when no problems are found
and it is stable, then get promoted to /release,
and keep this cycle.
>
>Thus, /dev and /release will be sunstudio, but I
don't know how one can get /hipster promoted to
/dev because of gcc.
>
>I guess it could be that /hipster always stays out
there as a -current while /dev and /release stay
with sunstudio because right now /dev is most
rock-solid and that should not be taken away.
While /hipster has newer packages available, if
someone is on /dev or /release there are other
options rather than trying to get what is in
/hipster. opencsw.org has many current packages
available, so anyone using /dev and /release can get them from opencsw.org.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: ken mays <[email protected]>
>To: OpenIndiana Developer mailing list <[email protected]>
>Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 4:30 PM
>Subject: Re: [oi-dev] Release engineering // planing
>
>
>
>Agreed.
>
>
>I'd suggest the same for the '07/2013 RELEASE' to at least update /dev repo
>to the current "approved" /hipster Illumos-gate snapshot before pushing to
>/release.
>
>
>You could respin the oi_151a7 ISO with that recent Illumos_gate snapshot so
>people can still test the Illumos_gate snapshot for current issues.
>(oi_151a7.1)
>
>
>
>The /hipster oi-userland changes should get pushed to /dev from that point
>with the same snapshot of Illumos_gate from /release. You then update the
>Illumos builds from that point of reference.
>
>
>Example:
>
>
>/release= /dev
>
>Illumos_gate_47f42be153c1 +
>oi_151a7 (old /dev repo)
>
>
>
>new /dev = /hipster
>
>Illumos_gate_47f42be153c1 +
>
>OI-JDS_2b18d0590968 +
>
>oi-userland (s12_26)
>
>(whatever else)
>
>
>
>~ Ken Mays
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Piotr Jasiukajtis <[email protected]>
>To: OpenIndiana Developer mailing list <[email protected]>
>Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 2:33 PM
>Subject: Re: [oi-dev] Release engineering // planing
>
>
>I think an updated illumos-gate
packages should go into oi_151a7
first, because of NFS related
BUG fix #2986.
>
>On Jul 11, 2013, at 8:08 PM, Udo
Grabowski (IMK) <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>> On 11/07/2013 18:53,
Alasdair Lumsden wrote:
>>> ....
>>> I do think that /dev
should get moved to /release,
and /hipster should go to
>>> /dev. Not many know
about hipster beyond the oi-dev
list. It would show people
>>> in the outside world
that progress is being made on
OI.A
>> > ...
>>
>> But at that point, there
should be provided a way to
switch
>> current people on /dev to
/release, surely most do not
want
>> to be exposed to hipster...
>> And that seems not to be
trivial, probably it needs a
bump
>> to a new release number.
>> Personally I think this
switch should be done now on the
>> base of a7 (sunstudio
compiled, with maybe a few
couple of
>> known stable fixes), as
hipster is currently going
sidewards
>> with all the changes to
gcc, it will probably not
stabilize
>> within the next two months,
and a7 is mostly rock stable
>> (with a few user visible
problems due to the png12
<--> png14
>> hassles).
>>
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
>> oi-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>
>--
>Piotr Jasiukajtis
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>oi-dev mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>oi-dev mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list [email protected]
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
