Subject: Re: [post-1.2] scsibus attachment changes...
To: Michael Graff <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G Demetriou <Chris_G_Demetriou@ux2.sp.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 08/29/1996 21:23:50
> > Do I think it's sad that the release process is this long when
> > there will be features in -current immediately after 1.2 is released,
> > which will make the "stable" 1.2 release immediately obsolete for
> > some classes of users?
> > YES.
> Do I think that there needs to be at the very least monthly "unnoficial"
> snapshots for those who wish to make them?
err, "for those who wish to have them." 8-)
There are, for some ports. E.g. i try to do a snapshot every month or
two for the Alpha... looking at my recent snapshot archives, i did
them on (yymmdd) 960615, 960606, 960425, 960224, and 960122. (I built
one last week, but didn't ship it since i was _hoping_ that the final
1.2 freeze would happen soon and didn't want to ship two in quick
succession, because that really screws mirrors. Note that i keep
all snapshots that I ship on-line until i run out of space for them,
at which point i archive them on CD-ROMs...)
Of course, as the above comment makes clear, the current frequency of
snapshots depends on the port maintainer of the port in question...
It's not like a snapshot for one port can hold up the snapshot for
another... I've thought for a long time that ports should have
regular snapshots built; i tried to do that for a while for the i386,
and i do it now for the Alpha.
(In other words, i agree with you, but it's not a "release" issue, and
you shouldn't be so quick to condemn us all for "the sins of the