From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 18 13:16:23 2006 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 DB5B916A412 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:16:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Stephen.Clark@seclark.us) Received: from smtpout06-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpout06-01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.224]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 63B2D43D7C for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:16:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Stephen.Clark@seclark.us) Received: (qmail 31434 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2006 13:16:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (24.144.77.138) by smtpout06-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.227) with ESMTP; 18 Sep 2006 13:16:22 -0000 Message-ID: <450E9C25.2000604@seclark.us> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:16:21 -0400 From: Stephen Clark User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22smp i686; en-US; m18) Gecko/20010110 Netscape6/6.5 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200609180950.k8I9oVrQ087071@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <200609180950.k8I9oVrQ087071@lurza.secnetix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?! X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Stephen.Clark@seclark.us List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:16:23 -0000 Oliver Fromme wrote: >Michael Abbott wrote: > > Roland Smith wrote: > > > Martin Nilsson wrote: > > > > Hans Lambermont wrote: > > > > .. or just stop calling it STABLE and call it RELENG_6 instead > > > > > > That's a good idea, IMHO. When I started with FreeBSD I found the > > > difference between the branch names and cvs tags confusing. > > > > Let me second that. I hadn't realised that STABLE==RELENG_n (where n is > > the current version number) until very recently, and I've seen the "STABLE > > isn't stable" thing crop up over and over again over the last few years, > > both on mailing lists and IRC. > >Actually, FreeBSD has three types of branches: > > - current a.k.a. HEAD > - X-stable a.k.a. RELENG_X > - X.Y security branch a.k.a. RELENG_X_Y > >I think it would be better to rename the 2nd one "RELENG" >(instead of "STABLE"), because that's exactly what it is: >the release-engineering branch from which the releases are >derived. > >The term "STABLE" would be much better suitable for the >3rd type of branches which are currently called "security >branches". Thus we would have: > > - current > - releng > - stable > >Then the names match exactly what the branches are: >"current" is the current head of experimental development, >"releng" is the release engineering branch, and "stable" >is the stable branch for people who want to track only >security fixes and the most critical stuff. > >Such appropriate naming would certainly prevent a lot of >confusion. > >Best regards > Oliver > > > I agree! My $.02 Steve -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Ben Franklin) "The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." (Thomas Jefferson)