From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jul 23 10:44:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from snafu.adept.org (snafu.adept.org [63.201.63.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4D4837B408 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:44:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@adept.org) Received: by snafu.adept.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 979779EE06; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by snafu.adept.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F48A9B00C; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Mike Hoskins To: Lamont Granquist Cc: "A. L. Meyers" , Steve Lumos , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: is "stable" "stable"? In-Reply-To: <20010723095250.B66779-100000@coredump.scriptkiddie.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Lamont Granquist wrote: > You're checking out the head of a development tree. It will never > be stable in your sense. As mentioned before it might theoretically > be best to rename "stable" but it needs a volunteer (you?) to do the > work to fix all the breakage which will result. This is the real problem - some individuals don't understand (don't CHOOSE to understand?) -STABLE means "more stable than -CURRENT" vs. "100% stable on 100% of the machines in the world." Granted, I never saw any official member of the FreeBSD community say "-STABLE is 100% stable on 100% of the machines in the world", so I never assumed -STABLE meant that. > > Do you seriously expect > > all users to go thru the testing procedures enumerated below? > Then use a point release with the security patches applied. Exactly. I expect users to RTFM enough not to shoot themselves in the foot. Afterall, it's your foot. Failing that, I expect them to bandage their own foot rather than asking why it was so easy to misfire after they loaded the gun and pointed it at their foot. > matrix we're talking about. Of course, are you volunteering to do QA on > code before it goes into stable? If you've got the hardware and the > manpower then maybe we can do something about it. That'd be nice... and expensive. *eyes QA racks for MUCH smaller matrix* :) Later, -Mike -- Log analysis mailing list: http://www.adept.org/mailinglists.html#logwatchers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message