From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Aug 3 10:12:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.22.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26E9837B401; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:12:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f73HBs4128776; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:11:55 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20010802190716.A7770@freeway.dcfinc.com> References: <01080300314100.00395@spatula.home> <20010802170621.A7087@freeway.dcfinc.com> <01080301194203.00395@spatula.home> <20010802190716.A7770@freeway.dcfinc.com> Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:11:51 -0400 To: "Chad R. Larson" , Kris Kennaway From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: RELENG_4_3 calls itself -RELEASE? Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" 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 At 7:07 PM -0700 8/2/01, Chad R. Larson wrote: >On Fri, Aug 03, 2001, Andrew Boothman wrote: > > I prefer -SECURITY, because it makes it clear this is the > > branch dedicated to security fixes and nothing else. > >Yes, but then the newbies would think this was some special >release with extra security features. And complain when they >get rooted. We go through "why isn't -STABLE really stable" >three or four times per year. > >I'd rather a tag that didn't imply some kind of promise. > >But I agree, it should be something other than -RELEASE. I agree it should change, and should not be -SECURITY or -SECURE. In the interest of keeping it simple and yet nondescript, I would prefer something like -RELEASE+ or -RELEASE-PLUS While something like BEET or RUTABAGA is also nondescript, I think that's a little too silly for this branch. I know several sysadmin's who have been very happy to have this branch around. I could see changing the *stable* branch to a name like beet, rutabaga, or maybe rawcarrot (which is then "cooked" for release... :-). Maybe that would finally get rid of the confusion of people who read too much into the name "stable". For that matter, perhaps we should name the "security-fixes" branch as -stable, and then change the branch we currently call stable to be -kitchen, and change -current to be -frontier or -scarymovie. [really, any naming scheme is fine by me personally. I'd just like to see if we could come up with something so we didn't have to debate some branch-name every three or four months. So, I hope that by tossing several disparate ideas out, maybe something will make sense. Note: 'disparate', not 'desperate' :-) ] -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message