Fallout from the CVS discussion

[Warner Losh]

On Sep 16, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Doug Barton wrote:

> On 09/16/2012 09:03, Warner Losh wrote:
>> One of the things we are trying to move towards is that current can be cut into a release branch on short notice.  We need to keep it as close to production ready as possible.  People
> 
> I find your response here interesting Warner, given that when I have
> opposed what I felt were too-drastic changes in HEAD (such as removing
> sysinstall before a post-install configuration solution was ready) your
> response has been, "It's HEAD, we can break things ... let's see what
> happens!"

sysinstall replacement was a different discussion, with differing technical criteria.

Also, using it against me now for consistency likely isn't so good.  I think we moved too quickly, in retrospect, on that.  That experience suggests we be more cautious in the future, including for things like this.

> Now that you are the one opposed to the change, we need to
> keep HEAD "close to production ready."

Look at bz's push in this area.  Also, I'm not opposed to this change, just opposed to this change today, as explained elsewhere.

> There is a compromise solution here that I have been hesitant to offer
> because I was really hoping that sanity would prevail. But why not
> switch the default MK_CVS knob over to "no" now? That will give us an
> opportunity to see if there really will be any fallout, and easily fix
> it if there is.

I believe that's already been done.

Warner