Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:29:06 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Evan Dower <evantd@hotmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_5_0 v. HEAD Message-ID: <20030401182906.GD4151@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <F136R6sKBEr8pkpLkTg00006c1d@hotmail.com> References: <F136R6sKBEr8pkpLkTg00006c1d@hotmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 09:42:25AM -0800, Evan Dower wrote: > I've been tracking RELENG_5_0 pretty much since it existed, but I am > wondering now if it would be better to track -CURRENT via HEAD instead. > After all, with the semi-frozen status of HEAD, all knew commits should be > fairly conservative and the _general_ _ trend_ should at least be toward a > more stable product. I wonder if HEAD is actually a more stable product > than RELENG_5_0. Sometimes is, sometimes isn't. You have to be fairly careful to upgrade at the right time based on commit activity and mailing list traffic. > Certainly it would be for anyone using the nvidia-driver, > since it is unsupported on RELENG_5_0. What are your thoughts? It's just as unsupported on HEAD. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+idpxWry0BWjoQKURAokYAKDk6ysVFAHFOTbQhiEw6aT22PdaOgCdHDTG ZOduStEsM9lokznqy2Loemk= =aPIT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030401182906.GD4151>