From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 19 22:59:01 2005 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 52E9116A41F for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:59:01 +0000 (GMT) (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 D7E3D43D49 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:58:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8JMwu0F029027; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:58:56 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <432F42BA.8070507@samsco.org> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:59:06 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050615 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Paul T. Root" References: <432F132A.1060200@iaces.com> In-Reply-To: <432F132A.1060200@iaces.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: swhetzel@gmail.com, "Sandro Noel." , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Eriq Subject: Re: any ideas when 5.5 will be out 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: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:59:01 -0000 Paul T. Root wrote: > In the past, x.0 releases are meant for the adventurous > not the production oriented. > > I never go before x.1. And I skipped 3.x completely. > I just got my final server from 4.11 to 5.4 in July. > > 6.x is probably still 9-12 months away from prime time. > But that's just a guess on my part. I do know that they > are pushing on it harder than they did for 5.0. > > Sandro Noel. wrote: > 6.0 is indeed receiving quite a bit of testing and bugfixing. It's a bit presumptuous to make public claims that it's "9-12 months away," though. I can appreciate the conventional wisdom of staying away from N.0 releases, but we are putting quite a bit of effort into this one. 6.1 is not going to be 9-12 months away either, nor will 6.2. The 6.x line is generating quite a bit of excitement and will be a very good set of releases. Scott