From owner-freebsd-stable  Thu Oct  2 10:01:59 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA08741
          for stable-outgoing; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08724
          for <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA11921; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com>
cc: andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: CVSUP vs. SNAPS 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 02 Oct 1997 06:58:03 PDT."
             <199710021358.GAA28556@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> 
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 10:01:00 -0700
Message-ID: <11918.875811660@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Please, not again, don't duplicate the errors of your past handling
> of this.
> 
> The sequence of commits should be something that creates
> 
> 2.2-STABLE (where we are today)
> 2.2.5-BETA (for while we are in BETA on the branch)
> 2.2.5-RELEASE (when you finally roll the puppy up)
> 2.2.5-STABLE (after you roll the release).

That would be totally and utterly bogus.

					Jordan