From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jun 11 15:51:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from vimfuego.saarinen.org (saarinen.org [203.79.82.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E618A37B401 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 15:51:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from juha@saarinen.org) Received: from vimfuego.saarinen.org ([192.168.1.1]) by vimfuego.saarinen.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hack)) id 159aWx-0005z2-00; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:51:31 +1200 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:51:31 +1200 (NZST) From: Juha Saarinen To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: "mixtim@home.com" , "rjackson@cs.csubak.edu" , "stable@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: Re: Why is the STABLE branch not so stable anymore? In-Reply-To: <20010611153217J.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> Message-ID: X-S: Always MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > Finally, let's not forget that nobody is FORCING you to run -stable. > In fact, users in your category are always recommended to stick with > the releases and not upgrade until a new one comes out so I'm not > even sure why we're having this conversation in the first place. I'm confused about this. The Handbook says to track -STABLE, if errr... you want stability. Are you saying that in order to have a stable system, we should stick with -RELEASE? Maybe remove the -STABLE branch then? -- Regards, Juha PGP fingerprint: B7E1 CC52 5FCA 9756 B502 10C8 4CD8 B066 12F3 9544 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message