Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 19:05:55 -0500 From: "Derik Wilson" <dwilson32@kc.rr.com> To: <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: The Old Way Was Better Message-ID: <005501c37666$24368380$3b431c41@webkl7bcj7ou3q> References: <20030908063856.W80387-100000@moo.sysabend.org> <20030908161846.T32034@12-234-22-23.pyvrag.nggov.pbz> <004901c37665$ec361e50$3b431c41@webkl7bcj7ou3q>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
By the way, sorry for the nasty spelling. LOL! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Derik Wilson" <dwilson32@kc.rr.com> To: <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 7:04 PM Subject: Re: The Old Way Was Better > Like a sid a long time ago. I am a freeBSD newb so as you can guess I like > to learn all I can about freeBSD and anything else for that matter, however, > at the moment, all I see are people bickering about something that they can > no longer control. The release of freeBSD 5.x. This doesn't help. Let's > find a way to learn from this instead of firing opinions at each other about > how we think one release is better than the other. > > Sorry if I am stepping over my boundries but can we talk about the good > things that cam from the new release and maybe some problems that can be > addressed (but not in an offensive manner.) Debates are good when > controlled and guided. > > Thanks all! Keep us newbies alive! > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Doug Barton" <DougB@freebsd.org> > To: "Jamie Bowden" <ragnar@sysabend.org> > Cc: "Michel Talon" <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr>; <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 6:20 PM > Subject: Re: The Old Way Was Better > > > > On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Jamie Bowden wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Doug Barton wrote: > > > > > > > As for the rest of your post, it's all very interesting, but > incredibly > > > > unlikely to happen. The creation of the RELENG_4_X branches solved the > > > > immediate need for a "stable branch plus security fixes." 5.x is still > > > > -current, and while we do need to be more careful with our marketing > > > > (and more careful with what goes into a 5.x release), massive branch > > > > renaming just isn't going to happen, nor is expanding the number of > > > > branches going to help. > > > > > > Once -STABLE moves from 4.x to 5.x (so that the project is back on > 5.x-R, > > > 5-S, and 5-C), is STABLE once again going to BE stable? > > > > We are delaying the branch in -current until we're reasonably confident > > that the thing is stable enough to use in a production system. Of > > course, as soon as we declare it "stable" then the number of users will > > go up dramatically, and more bugs will be found. This is inevitable. > > > > Doug > > > > -- > > > > This .signature sanitized for your protection > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?005501c37666$24368380$3b431c41>