From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Oct 15 20:37:04 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA03127 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 20:37:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA03122 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 20:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (root@agora.rdrop.com [199.2.210.241]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with SMTP id UAA24558 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 20:37:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eel.dataplex.net by agora.rdrop.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #17) id m0vDMmu-00095gC; Tue, 15 Oct 96 20:36 PDT Received: from [208.2.87.4] (cod [208.2.87.4]) by eel.dataplex.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA07680; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 22:31:17 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender: rkw@eel.dataplex.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199610160224.VAA26891@brasil.moneng.mei.com> References: <199610160117.KAA27501@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Oct 16, 96 10:47:45 am Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 22:29:03 -0500 To: Joe Greco From: Richard Wackerbarth Subject: Re: IP bugs in FreeBSD 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >If need be, make it clear to people that 2.1.5R may be a more suitable >choice for the sake of stability, and follow up with a 2.2.5R cleanup >release to handle the problems discovered in 2.2R. > >At some point, the line has to be drawn. I generally agree with your approach. However I would suggest that not 2.1.5, but 2.1.x is the appropriate one for production. IMHO, we need to continue to provide some support for it until what would by current practice be called 2.2.5 comes out. I also think that it would improve our image if we would call THAT release 2.2.0 and have a formal PRE_RELEASE that we call 2.2 Beta.