From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 8 23:47:05 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CE5B16A401 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2006 23:47:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1826C43D49 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2006 23:47:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k38Nl3BM020215; Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:47:03 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <44384B77.8010006@samsco.org> Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 17:47:03 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rong-En Fan References: <6eb82e0604081602u314fd213lf628319174d383e2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6eb82e0604081602u314fd213lf628319174d383e2@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_6_1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 23:47:05 -0000 Rong-En Fan wrote: > Hi, > > According to the webpage [1], 6.1 has been branched on April 5. However, > I noticed that there is a tag called RELENG_6_1, not a branch called > RELENG_6_1. For example, sys/conf/newvers.sh [2], rev 1.69.2.11, > is on RELENG_6 branch with tag RELENG_6_1_BP and RELENG_6_1. > > It is a bit strange for me. At least, we have RELENG_X_Y branch before > and RELENG_X_Y_BP tag. Is there any special reason that we have > a tag instead of a branch for 6.1? > > Regards, > Rong-En Fan > RELENG_6_1 is a branch tag (or at least it should have been unless I screwed it up). The _BP tag always comes before the branch tag. I just checked CVS and it appears to agree with this. Can you give an example of what is wrong? Scott