If memory serves me right, Colin Percival wrote: > Bruce A. Mah wrote: >> We've done point releases in the past but only in cases where there were >> severe problems and/or regressions with released versions. Look at the >> announcements and release notes for 4.6.2-RELEASE and >> 5.2.1-RELEASE...these were the two most recent instances where we did >> this. There's a reason for this...it's a lot of effort. >> >> Folks should realize that making a new release (even a new point >> release) is not just a matter of tagging the tree and typing "make >> release". We (re@) need to figure out exactly what bugs are to be >> fixed, get the changes merged and tested, build at least one release >> candidate, get that tested, and finally build a set of RELEASE bits and >> push them out. > > I point releases have been obsoleted by errata notices. In the past when > X.Y.Z-RELEASE has happened, it has been because of critical bugs in the > X.Y-RELEASE which there wasn't any other mechanism to fix. Now that we > have errata noticed and FreeBSD Update is in the base system, it's vastly > easier for users to run "freebsd-update fetch install" than it is for them > to upgrade to a new release.
That's a good point. I'd be happy if we never had to do another point release again, since we have to do probably half the work of a normal release cycle but it's completely unexpected and unscheduled. BTW I finally added some mention of freebsd-update(8) to the section of the release notes that talks about upgrading FreeBSD. Only on HEAD for now, I'll put this on RELENG_6 when I get a Round Tuit. >> PS. This having been said I know there are some kernel fixes that were >> candidates for errata against 6.2-RELEASE...I'm not sure what their >> current state is. > > Don't ask me, I just approve the errata which you send to me. Which hasn't > been anything at all lately. :-) Ah no, we haven't sent you anything as of late, and that's the problem. :-) Bruce.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature