From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Mar 13 10:35:19 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from wall.polstra.com (rtrwan160.accessone.com [206.213.115.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E5A14CB1 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:35:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jdp@polstra.com) Received: from vashon.polstra.com (vashon.polstra.com [206.213.73.13]) by wall.polstra.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA29979; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:34:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jdp@polstra.com) From: John Polstra Received: (from jdp@localhost) by vashon.polstra.com (8.9.2/8.9.1) id KAA64847; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:34:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jdp@polstra.com) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:34:54 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199903131834.KAA64847@vashon.polstra.com> To: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com Subject: Re: What do people think of May 1st for a 3.2 release date? In-Reply-To: <32125.921321982@zippy.cdrom.com> Organization: Polstra & Co., Seattle, WA Cc: stable@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In article <32125.921321982@zippy.cdrom.com>, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > It's a little close on the heels of 3.1, but there have been a > significant number of things found and fixed in 3.1 that I'm almost > itching for a 3.1.1 at this point. Failing that, and I think a point > release would be just a bit overkill anyway, we can do 3.2 after a > reasonable minimum interval period and that would be, IMO, May 1st at > the earliest. I'd prefer 3.2 over 3.1.1. I don't think any of the bugfixes are urgent enough to merit a point release. John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-interest is the aphrodisiac of belief." -- James V. DeLong To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message