Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 10:10:34 +0200 From: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> To: Chris <chrcoluk@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: freebsd naming of releases Message-ID: <20050403081034.GA870@zaphod.nitro.dk> In-Reply-To: <3aaaa3a050402233952162788@mail.gmail.com> References: <3aaaa3a0503271958205ca8e1@mail.gmail.com> <20050403014218.GA57319@intserv.int1.b.intern> <3aaaa3a050402233952162788@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2005.04.03 08:39:43 +0100, Chris wrote: > Well you cannot change how people think and act, rather then changing > the way thousands of people think I think its better to change how the > naming is done on non stable releases, what happened with 5.x was that > it was named to get more people to use and as such more testing but > they were fooled into thinking it was based on stable code and so we "fooled into"??? I think the release announcements pretty clearly stated what the releases were. Of cause if people can't be bothered to read that, then there is not really much else to do. > seen mass datacentres and individual users using 5.1 and 5.2 for > production use, then when 5.3 did the library version bump lots of > issues arose from it because so many people were using 5.1 and 5.2. --=20 Simon L. Nielsen --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCT6T6h9pcDSc1mlERAm8ZAJ4t3TRulRIULGbVllzHVHrbvj3iGgCgqg4g BGBNTgvFnNVRVZASgt7xenE= =Wn4F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050403081034.GA870>