From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jan 25 14:06:43 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA19712 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:06:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from cantor.boolean.net (cantor.boolean.net [209.133.111.73]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA19702 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:06:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org) Received: from gypsy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cantor.boolean.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA05300; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:04:25 GMT (envelope-from Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990125140334.0095c5a0@localhost> X-Sender: guru@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:03:34 -0800 To: Richard Wackerbarth From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" Subject: Re: What Mailing LIST for 2.2-STABLE Cc: "Ron 'The InSaNe One' Rosson" , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: References: <19990125101153.B5527@the.oneinsane.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 03:39 PM 1/25/99 -0600, Richard Wackerbarth wrote: >Yes, I think that it should exist. > >I also recommend a methodology to make it easy for users in >the future. Personally, I think the concept of "stable" vs "current" is easy. Yes, the current revision of "stable" and "current" continue to move forward, but "stable" is always the latest release + patches and current is always what on the HEAD. >Call the lists "2.2", "3", "HEAD", etc. > rather than "stable" and "current". Yiks!... I'd hate to have to subscribe to 3.1 then 3.2 then 3.3.... and I'd hate it MORE if someone changed my subscriptions for me. >On the other end, the 1.x, 2.0, etc. lists can be merged into one >"UNSUPPORTED" list by merging the lists and playing with the aliases. >The aliases can be phased out by an auto-responder that reminds to sender >that the name they are using has been deprecated. stable has welcomed postings for prior "stable" releases. Having multiple lists on fragments the discussions. Continued discussions of 2.2-stable on -stable is fine. You'll always have "that's fixed in the latest stable" no matter what as most folks don't immediately update to -stable as the commits hit the repository. I suggest we just keep the lists/archives the way they are... Kurt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message