[RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version
demelier.david at gmail.com
Thu Jun 22 12:52:44 UTC 2017
2017-06-22 14:18 GMT+02:00 Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at freebsd.org>:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 02:15:02PM +0200, David Demelier wrote:
> As usual with such proposal, where do you find the manpower to handle the number
> of branches required (the quarterly branches are already hard to maintain, it is
> only one branch).
I think release branches won't need much maintainance as unless a
security issue is found, no updates are necessary.
> What do you do for security fixes: backport to the stable version? who is
> backporting to software not maintained upstream any more in the given branch?
I would never backport anything. It's quite the opposite. If a
security flaw is discovered in let say: OpenSSL; then we check if it's
present in the release branch and top port in quarterly then HEAD if
they are also affected by this issue.
Regarding your second mail, the question may also apply on HEAD :-)
More information about the freebsd-ports