Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 21:26:23 +0000 (UTC) From: JB <jb.1234abcd@gmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELEASE vice CURRENT vice STABLE Message-ID: <loom.20101203T222221-813@post.gmane.org> References: <AANLkTim1_-zNc9%2BxZXJv=W9oYO0EAt6155NZaHfYFB8U@mail.gmail.com> <20101203194605.068da7e8.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Polytropon <freebsd <at> edvax.de> writes: > ... > See the text file /usr/share/misc/bsd-family-tree for > details. > Hi, thanks for your response. I looked at that diagram of UNIX and *BSD history. When I go to the bottom of it (CURRENT state) I see a difference in how FreeBSD and other *BSD are developed. I am not sure that I should interpret it this way, but perhaps it is a case of WYSIWYG. The other *BSD are developed sequentially, that is, there is one branch and each major/minor release cycle follows the previous one (at no time there is a parallel major/minor branch development). In case of FreeBSD, it seems (visually) that there is some mainline CURRENT branch repository since FreeBSD 1.0 time, from which major branches are started in parallel (right now there are 8.2-CURRENT and 9.0-CURRENT developed, if I am correct), and they end their own life so to speak, without affecting other major branches; but there were periods of sequential dvelopments as well, e.g. 5.0 thru 5.2. So, this is the overview, as I see it. But, if my interpretation above is correct, then the question arises at what time at least some of the changes (not all, because some may be confined to individual branches only) from major and their subsequent minor branches are contributed back to the mainline CURRENT branch, so next major branches can start and build upon some common base in an organized manner ? I would appreciate your comments. JB
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?loom.20101203T222221-813>