svn commit: r189594 - head

[Steve Kargl]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 08:38:10PM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote:
> 
> As mlaier has pointed out, -current has sharp edges.  It's one of
> 3 choices open to you, the other two being -stable (which will still
> have ports regressions from time to time -- see xorg -- and sometimes
> even src regressions), and a release, which is the best we can do with
> respect to QA.  If you can't deal with having your system out of
> commission on occasion, then -current isn't for you.
> 

Oh Please!

I've run -current since it was called 386bsd+patchkit.  I've
lived through the gcc 2.6.3 to gcc 3.x transition, the replacement
of devfs by phk with a new improved devfs, the problems with
libm and the changes to stdio.h among many others.  The facts
remain that the USB2 transistion was poorly executed.  Contrast USB2
with Ed's new TTY layer.  Ed gave a month or more headsup that a
new TTY layer was coming.  He enumerated the drivers that were broken
and actively solicited people with the affected hardware for help.
He furthermore helped those people fix as many driver as possible
before committing the new TTY layer.  As part of portmngr, you
know Ed also actively fixed many ports broken by the new TTY layer
and/or helped others fix the ports before the new layer became
standard.  The fact that USB2 broke such a fundamentally important
port as Xorg suggests a lack of testing and planning by those who
rushed the USB2 transition.

If you and others take off your rose colored glasses, you'll see
that the USB2 transition could have been handled better.  Hopefully,
you're willing to learn from your mistakes.

-- 
Steve