From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 26 23:04:42 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 983EA18E for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 23:04:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from b.smeelen@ose.nl) Received: from mail.ose.nl (mail.ose.nl [212.178.134.164]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 285F78FC15 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 23:04:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Footer: b3NlLm5s Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.ose.nl (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher AES256-SHA (256 bits)) for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 00:04:39 +0100 Message-ID: <50B3F587.9020602@ose.nl> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 00:04:39 +0100 From: Bas Smeelen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD i386; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 9.1-RELEASE References: <20121126214212.CF2DCE6739@smtp.hushmail.com> <50B3EC42.2050304@ose.nl> <50B3F1C3.2070801@ose.nl> In-Reply-To: <50B3F1C3.2070801@ose.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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, 26 Nov 2012 23:04:42 -0000 On 11/26/12 23:48, Bas Smeelen wrote: > On 11/26/12 23:36, Rick Miller wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Bas Smeelen wrote: >>> Hi >>> Just modify newvers.sh to 9.1-RELEASE recompile and your on RELEASE :) >>> Who has a no non-release policy, management? >> It's not just management, Just to sum it up Make sure you document with second and third party approval! What you did and How you did it There is no reason to document for Why you did it, though this can be beneficial. With this, it comes to that the FreeBSD development and distributing model is very well, let's say highly transparent, it is up to you as a systems administrator or even developer (they are more out in the clear though) to account for (document and get this approved) and be transparant for all the actions that have been commited, to the FDA for instance in the industries (Pharma, Biomed, etc, I work in). I guess fbi, cia, nsa or other 'higher' governmental institutions don't have to account for this, because they are much smarter anyway. I apologise for the dutch grammar. Cheers > > checked, they don't have a clue, that's what we're here for > >> but also software engineers, > > checked, mutually accepted, they know what you're up to, and keep them > clear, be honest > and even better, they know what they're up to, but try to blame you for > just keep them as very close 'friends' > it helps when you are able to 'clean up their messes sometimes' > >> architects > > is like in between management and software engineers, dangerous maybe > >> , and >> business folks. > > management or otherwise > >> When a company runs a service whose production SLA is >> 100%, many tend to be less forgiving. > > 100% that's a dare! > For them it may be 100%, for me I am at 98% then, at best 99,636% :) > There is a lot of playfield unknown > >> There's a lot riding on running >> a development branch in production, even if it is a "Release >> Candidate". >> > > Agree 100% :) > RELEASE is better than RC or even BETA for sakes ;) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"