Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 06:06:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Ralph Huntington <rjh@mohawk.net> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Stable branch Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010050546550.8007-100000@mohegan.mohawk.net> In-Reply-To: <20001004220906.D50210@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 11:40:21PM +0100, Paul Richards wrote: > > Stable would stagnate to some extent, certainly more so than it On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, David O'Brien wrote: > I disagree that a stable branch should stagnate to some extent -- so how Stable branch is very important for production use and should incorporate bug fixes and security patches, but not feature enhancements. The extent of support and maintenance for stable should be one major release prior to the latest release (not current), i.e., since 4.x-RELEASE is the latest, then 3.x-STABLE hould be supported with bug fixes and security patches until a 5.x-RELEASE is out. Does this seem unreasonable? -=r=- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0010050546550.8007-100000>