From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 16 1:31:15 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0C3A237B718 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 01:31:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 78961 invoked by uid 100); 16 Mar 2001 09:31:10 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15025.56670.539540.505724@guru.mired.org> Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 03:31:10 -0600 To: Haikal Saadh Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.3-BETA In-Reply-To: <20010316085350.16080.qmail@web1608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <010b01c0adbc$eb1654a0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20010316085350.16080.qmail@web1608.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.89 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Haikal Saadh types: > > --- Matthew Emmerton wrote: > > > What is a BETA system? Is it similiar to CURRENT? > > > > Please search through the mailing list archives > > before asking questions. > > This has been answered many times over the last two > > weeks. > > > > 4.2-STABLE became 4.3-BETA when the code was frozen, > > prior to becoming > > 4.3-RELEASE. > > > Oooh...as a newbie, I've been bitten twice by > this...CVSUPing hoping the get the latest STABLE, but > get a BETA (4.1.1, and now 4.3)... I always thought I > had made an error in my supfiles, and since nothing > major seemed to have broke, just ignored it. > > Perhaps it would be a good idea to make it so that > either: > - UPDATING mentions that it's a beta you have, > OR > - not put BETAs into the STABLE branch? Or maybe just read the FAQ , which makes it clear that the name changes just identify what point of the release cycle that particular snapshot of -STABLE is at. The name change tells you you have a beta, so having UPDATING tell you that is redundant. UPDATING is for explaining about things that you might break when updating, and so isn't the place for an explanation of what the BETA means. Not putting them on -STABLE would basically mean freezing stable at that point, creating a new branch to put them on, having everyone work on that branch, then merging it back into -STABLE when it becomes A -RELEASE. That's a lot more painful - even if all you're doing is tracking it - than dealing with questions from people who haven't searched the web site. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message