From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct 12 23:01:22 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDE6716A4CE
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:01:22 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from imo-m25.mx.aol.com (imo-m25.mx.aol.com [64.12.137.6])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4722843D3F
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:01:22 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from TM4525@aol.com)
Received: from TM4525@aol.com
	by imo-m25.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id n.15d.40b85c95 (14374)
	 for <questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:01:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: TM4525@aol.com
Message-ID: <15d.40b85c95.2e9dbc3f@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:01:19 EDT
To: questions@freebsd.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5114
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Release Question
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:01:22 -0000

In a message dated 10/11/04 7:02:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
v.velox@vvelox.net writes:
> I hope you're not betting your business on these questions, because
> the reality is that 1) they're not very good questions and 2) the
> people who are answering them can't really know the answers.
> "stable" requires time, and since 5.2.1 and 5.3 are substantially
> different, I can't see how one can predict the level of stability a
> year from now. 

Following this logic any thing can be claimed to not be stable.
------------------------------

uh, like yeah thats correct. Linux comes to mind....