[RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version

demelier.david at gmail.com demelier.david at gmail.com
Fri Jun 23 08:47:49 UTC 2017

On Thu, 2017-06-22 at 16:11 -0500, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 12:32:45PM -0400, scratch65535 at att.net wrote:
> > My problem is that my industry experience tells me that reducing
> > the frequency of port releases is practically *guaranteed* to be
> > a Really Good Thing for everyone.
> I remember before we had the quarterly releases, and people on the
> mailing lists complained constantly about the ports bits only being
> available once per release, or rolling with -head.

Quarterly branches do not solve anything.

A user installs a machine on March, it uses 2017Q1. Then in April an
additional software must be installed, as we are in April, 2017Q2 is
available so two choices:

a. the user keeps 2017Q1 but won't have any security fixes as it is not
maintained anymore; possibly having security flaws.

b. the user switches to 2017Q2, this tree will probably have major
upgrades and possibly breaking existing stuff.

To me, quarterly branches are completely useless as they are not
maintained enough in time. Replacing them with release branches would
solve everything explained in this thread.


David Demelier

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list