From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Apr 4 09:21:45 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA20559 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 09:21:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA20554 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 09:21:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-usr11.etinc.com (dialup-usr11.etinc.com [204.141.95.132]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA10192; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 12:24:53 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970404121704.00b3b858@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 12:17:07 -0500 To: Luigi Rizzo From: dennis Subject: Re: Does de driver do 100MBIT Full Duplex? Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, hackers@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 05:56 PM 4/4/97 +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote: >> The "expectation" is that things that worked before will still work with a new >> release, and that there may be problems with new stuff. When there are >> problems with old stuff, you have a real perception problem with your product. >> There has been much talk about get publicity; getting corporate users to >> use FreeBSD, but until you get to a point where loading a new release is much >> less than a crapshoot It's just not going to happen on a widespread basis. > >It is quite explicit that 2.1.7 is the stable branch and 2.2 is >the experimental one. By choosing 2.2 you must know you are taking >some risks. Ho, ho hoooooold on now! When the -RELEASE is added to 2.2 it becomes the stable branch. Stable, as i understand it, is a branch of the latest release. Dennis