From owner-freebsd-stable  Thu Jun  6 13:34:48 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA04147
          for stable-outgoing; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 13:34:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA04138;
          Thu, 6 Jun 1996 13:34:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA17490; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 13:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
To: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>
cc: nate@sri.MT.net, stable@FreeBSD.org, committers@FreeBSD.org,
        scanner@webspan.net
Subject: Re: Status of -stable 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 06 Jun 1996 08:36:10 PDT."
             <199606061536.IAA00209@austin.polstra.com> 
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 13:32:32 -0700
Message-ID: <17488.834093152@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Well, I liked -stable too!  Are you sure you're not over-reacting to
> the recent nightmare?  That pesky post-traumatic stress syndrome thing?
> Hey, in time, the night sweats and flashbacks will pass. :-)

:-)

No, it's been a matter of concern for some time, actually.  David and
I have been talking about -stable in hushed tones of "What the f***
are we going to do about this wart long-term?  We can't keep doing
this!" for at least a year.  This may have been the last straw, but it
was hardly the only (or even most significant) one.  It's an ongoing
maintainance headache and we really don't have the resources to do
this, it's just that simple.

Either we make the process simpler (ditch CVS) or we get a lot more
people to work on FreeBSD and do it by brute force (yuck), but we
can't keep doing it with what we've got now.

					Jordan