From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 11 16:56:54 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97223106566B for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:56:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vx0-f182.google.com (mail-vx0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53AFF8FC13 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vxi39 with SMTP id 39so3220665vxi.13 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 09:56:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AteM7UgPh2dwYS5QFIjPjfnoXVd+QKmSPTO8Dq4pELk=; b=eRbw7B4Qp3FEwF/0CAp8/f19tqSYRmBkajeC1cZMCZm1PCMaUb9wLoL+8QG8EHkvRS +3DeUAsEWD1wT6nNgH4LDS38N13hQ4Zfb5xE8u0vK8juWKWk1GJKX/PHPrVaEHihyI1D O2G2EF5cpkWjddgvGIl3ps54FKXRDqlTrCNok= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.26.197 with SMTP id n5mr1744250vdg.462.1315760213549; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 09:56:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.161.138 with HTTP; Sun, 11 Sep 2011 09:56:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110911161228.EE0F5106564A@hub.freebsd.org> References: <4E6C829A.2080007@gmail.com> <20110911161228.EE0F5106564A@hub.freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 00:56:53 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: RhifcaiabGGsFFPhk2FwFstDBio Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: Simon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: johan Hendriks , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: 4.x era X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 16:56:54 -0000 I've heard this many times, and here's my (paraphrased) stock response: People remember FreeBSD 4.x fondly. They likely don't remember 3.x fondly. They remember 2.x fondly - because it was rock stable for a lot of users. Then 3.x came along, with (new!) softupdates, and VM changes, and some other stuff I was too young to understand. It was stable for me, but unstable for a lot of much more serious and larger users. 4.x was when that matured. People see 8.x as stable. Not in all situations, but in a lot of them. 9.x may not be as stable for some, but there's a lot of good stuff going into it. If the developers play their cards right, 9.x will be the cycle where those bugs are shaken out and later 9.x releases will be rock solid. The only way that (and hopefully, 10.0) is going to be rock stable and be remembered like 4.x was remembered is if users actively use it, report bugs and work with developers to fix it. Rather than, you know, staying on FreeBSD-4.x :-) Adrian