Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 09:02:50AM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> Well, we are coming up on a year since netbsd-9 was branched, or at
>> least will arrive there before this discussion resolves. So cutting
>> -10 before we hit 100 works for me :-)
>
> Nitpicking (and I don't know for the discussion resolving), but netbsd-9
> was branched on 2019-07-30 (so not even 1/2 a year yes).
>
> The branch for netbsd-10 can happen soon after Andrew is done (we need
> 10.0 on the build cluster ASAP).
I will admit that my comment was partly humor.
Thanks for pointing out the -9 branch date. Given that we have had an
RC, this branch is going much better than recent previous ones. I
realize it's always difficult, but I think we (mostly you, perhaps) are
doing better this time.
I did mean to be somewhat serious in saying it was going to be time to
start 10, just based on calendar, because I believe releases should be
no more than 18 months apart, and I think 12 months is ideal. Thus I am
in favor of starting a new branch 12 months after the last one was
started.
(I see the merits of points about lots of improvements in current vs 9
and the reasonableness of branching late spring and releasing fall, even
if that seems a bit aspirational.)
Just a quick note: when FreeBSD when from 9 to 10, we had to play 'hunt the wumpus' for all the autoconfig scripts that suddenly thought they were configuring for FreeBSD 1.0.
If you can arrange it, it might make sense to do a pkgsrc run on an experimental system that has the version as 10.0 rather than 9.9.xx before committing to a schedule given the experience of your sister BSD project.
Warner