Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 16:00:24 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Murray Stokely <murray@cdrom.com> Cc: Brian Haskin <haskin@ptway.com>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CVSUP vs. SNAPS Message-ID: <25507.875833224@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Oct 1997 15:17:54 PDT." <Pine.NEB.3.96.971002151201.6569A-100000@pooh.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Thu, 2 Oct 1997, Brian Haskin wrote: > % > > 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). > % > % Why this seems rather logical and easy to follow at least to me a > % newbie. > > Why? If we were in the 2.2.2-STABLE branch right now, it might make > some sense. But we're not. We're in 2.2-STABLE. It's a development > branch, not a specific release, and the naming scheme fits the > development paradigm rather well I think. > > There is no 2.2.5 branch where a -stable tree could be tracked, its > just a specific release from the 2.2 branch. So 2.2.5-stable wouldn't > make any sense. Thanks for summarizing my position so succinctly, Murray. ;-) Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?25507.875833224>