From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Jan 21 9:45:35 2003 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 E89CD37B406 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3150D43EB2 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:45:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bmah@employees.org) Received: from bmah.dyndns.org (12-240-204-110.client.attbi.com[12.240.204.110]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with ESMTP id <2003012117453105300lqm0ke>; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:45:31 +0000 Received: from intruder.bmah.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by bmah.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0LHjVA8002337; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:45:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bmah@intruder.bmah.org) Received: (from bmah@localhost) by intruder.bmah.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h0LHjUIf002336; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:45:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200301211745.h0LHjUIf002336@intruder.bmah.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5+ 20021120 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Ulrich Spoerlein Cc: toni@stderror.at, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: 5.0-STABLE ??? In-Reply-To: <20030121172611.3d2f7082.q@uni.de> References: <200301192336.h0JNam2r036785@lurza.secnetix.de> <01ad01c2c02c$e84eaf40$0101a8c0@cascade> <20030120032658.GA35779@gforce.johnson.home> <20030120200112.GA98053@devil.stderror.at> <20030121172611.3d2f7082.q@uni.de> Comments: In-reply-to Ulrich Spoerlein message dated "Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:26:11 +0100." From: "Bruce A. Mah" Reply-To: bmah@FreeBSD.org X-Face: g~c`.{#4q0"(V*b#g[i~rXgm*w;:nMfz%_RZLma)UgGN&=j`5vXoU^@n5v4:OO)c["!w)nD/!!~e4Sj7LiT'6*wZ83454H""lb{CC%T37O!!'S$S&D}sem7I[A 2V%N&+ X-Image-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Images/bmah-cisco-small.gif X-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_2087753530P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:45:30 -0800 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 --==_Exmh_2087753530P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii If memory serves me right, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: > On 2003/01/20-21:01:12 Toni Schmidbauer wrote: > > >On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 09:26:59PM -0600, Glenn Johnson wrote: > >> So if one decides to make the jump to 5.0 and wants to track > >> development, should -CURRENT be tracked or RELENG_5_0? > > > >-CURRENT > > > >RELENG_5_0 contains only critical bugfixes and security updates, > >as mentioned above. > > To finally clear things: Where will RELENG_5_1 come from? I guess it will > be branched from -CURRENT too? If we (RE) decide that the 5-STABLE development train should start with 5.1, I'm guessing we'd branch RELENG_5 and then branch RELENG_5_1 from that. We haven't really discussed this point. If not, we create RELENG_5_1 from HEAD, and revisit the issue when it comes time to do 5.2. In the end, the exact origin of RELENG_5_1 is much less likely to have any real effect on anybody than the state of the code at the time the branch is made. Cheers, Bruce. --==_Exmh_2087753530P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (FreeBSD) Comment: Exmh version 2.5+ 20020506 iD8DBQE+LYc62MoxcVugUsMRAt+hAKDInZtMjZORWV/aG3h4ZAFsaZ1H7gCgwczi txOcn3/IADzJ4/qhlXCQbDY= =yrQz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_2087753530P-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message