From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Apr 24 13:57:27 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id NAA16388 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 13:57:27 -0700 Received: from nanolon.gun.de (nanolon.gun.de [192.109.159.5]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA16382 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 13:57:18 -0700 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by nanolon.gun.de (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with UUCP id WAA19275 for freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 24 Apr 1995 22:57:10 +0200 Received: (from andreas@localhost) by knobel.GUN.de (8.6.9/8.6.9) id UAA06506 for freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Sun, 23 Apr 1995 20:19:21 +0200 From: Andreas Klemm Message-Id: <199504231819.UAA06506@knobel.GUN.de> Subject: Re: Minutes of the Thursday, April 13th core team meeting in Berkeley. To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 20:19:20 +0200 (MET DST) In-Reply-To: <199504200649.IAA02111@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Apr 20, 95 08:49:46 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 PGP2] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1562 Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Joerg Wunsch wrote: > Hmm, it's perhaps a question of naming. I think the Berkeley > tradition was to have even-numbered releases with lots of new stuff > and odd-numbered releases which have been mainly bugfix releases. > (I dunno if this has been intention or not.) > > However, _every_ release should be of some basic quality that's better > than say the average ***x release quality. We all know about 2.0, but > it should remain an exception. Yeah, what makes our job for 2.1 so > hard is the fact that 1.1.5.1 was of such a quality that it beats many > commercial systems -- and we want to have 2.1 at least as stable as > 1.1.5.1. I'd love to see a stable 2.1, too. I love the idea to bring out an interim version earlier, because 2.0 had it's flaws. But then I'd recommend to take the needed time, to make 2.1 as good as you are all telling us since months. I think everybody has the amount of understanding, that a 2.1 quality release takes a certain amount of time, after adding so much new features. So make a better 2.0 release with important bugfixes and a glimpse of 2.1 and please take the necessary time, to make a real nice 2.1. Otherwise it could happen, that we see a 2.1.5, soon, because you made it in a hurry. Thanks for you work Andreas /// -- andreas@knobel.gun.de /\/\___ Wiechers & Partner Datentechnik GmbH Andreas Klemm ___/\/\/ - Support Unix - akl@wup.de - *** apsfilter - irgendwie clever *** ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de:/pub/Linux/local/packs/APSfilter/aps-49...:-)