From nobody Mon Sep 28 13:13:39 2026 X-Original-To: dev-commits-src-all@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4hthZr645Yz6vPwT; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 13:13:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [66.216.25.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4hthZr2vswz3HWr; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 13:13:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=softfail (mx1.freebsd.org: 66.216.25.90 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of jhb@FreeBSD.org) smtp.mailfrom=jhb@FreeBSD.org; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=freebsd.org (policy=none) Received: by mail.baldwin.cx (Postfix) id EEFEE1EAA3; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:13:39 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <6280fdf4-0254-4953-b948-b6bac7796f80@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:13:39 -0400 List-Id: Commit messages for all branches of the src repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-src-all List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org Sender: owner-dev-commits-src-all@FreeBSD.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: git: 32137c41065c - main - sound: Retire the version constants Content-Language: en-US To: Jason Harmening Cc: Christos Margiolis , src-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org References: <6ab2bc22.412bd.10bb456f@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <2df20868-4983-4169-a94e-da6adf2fb3ea@FreeBSD.org> From: John Baldwin In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.4 (mail.baldwin.cx [0.0.0.0]); Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:13:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.5.2 at mail.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spamd-Bar: / X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.20 / 15.00]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.20)[]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[freebsd.org : No valid SPF, No valid DKIM,none]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[jhb]; ASN(0.00)[asn:19151, ipnet:66.216.0.0/18, country:US]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org,dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org]; R_SPF_SOFTFAIL(0.00)[~all:c]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; ALIAS_RESOLVED(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4hthZr2vswz3HWr On 9/26/26 13:37, Jason Harmening wrote: > I'd definitely agree on getting rid of the min/max/pref distinction and > just having a single version. > It's always seemed like a stretch to imagine any dependent module making a > meaningful distinction between those 3 versions in a way that wouldn't be > extremely fragile. > > Ideally, some form of module-specific versioning still seems useful for > addressing scenarios like the mixer_init() case I described above. Bumping > the global version for cases like that seems very heavy-handed, though > maybe it wouldn't be such a big issue in practice, or maybe some of the > recent suggestions for consolidating those version bumps could be useful in > cases like this. We already use __FreeBSD_version to mean there is a KPI or KBI change. I also think the recent thread on bumps was a bit exaggerated. Here's some data vs anecdotal "we bump too much" feelings: > git log --first-parent -G __FreeBSD_version --format=%cs sys/sys/param.h | uniq -c | head -30 1 2026-09-14 1 2026-09-09 1 2026-09-06 1 2026-09-05 1 2026-09-02 1 2026-08-27 1 2026-08-12 1 2026-06-19 1 2026-04-30 1 2026-04-25 1 2026-04-23 1 2026-04-06 1 2026-03-21 1 2026-03-12 1 2026-02-13 1 2026-01-25 1 2026-01-23 1 2026-01-16 1 2026-01-13 1 2025-12-18 1 2025-12-15 1 2025-12-09 1 2025-11-02 1 2025-10-30 1 2025-10-21 1 2025-09-29 1 2025-09-04 1 2025-08-18 1 2025-08-17 1 2025-08-16 As you can see, we've yet to have multiple bumps on a single day in the past year (which I agree should be avoided), but bumps are also rather sporadic. We have a few weeks a year where they cluster (multiple bumps in a week), but we also have entire months without a single bump. -- John Baldwin