From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Dec 9 00:54:48 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id AAA20294 for ports-outgoing; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 00:54:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.12]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id AAA20287; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 00:54:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (wck-ca9-06.ix.netcom.com [204.31.231.102]) by dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA15199; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 00:54:13 -0800 Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.8.4/8.6.9) id AAA11806; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 00:54:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 00:54:11 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199612090854.AAA11806@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com CC: committers@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org In-reply-to: <3183.850120001@time.cdrom.com> (jkh@time.cdrom.com) Subject: Re: freeze postponed another week.... From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk * Well, don't kill me, I just couldn't figure out why you'd be extending * the freeze by another week if you knew that the real date we're * waiting for (the 10th) is just the day after tomorrow. Given that, * I'd think that a more reasonable ports freeze date would be no later * than the 11th. I don't expect the release to immediately follow BETA, especially since this BETA is fairly different from ALPHA (and it's not only bugfixes, right?). Please correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Release Engineer. :) Since we've decided to build packages before the freeze (and I already have the whole thing built once and put up for ftp), I'm trying to aim the freeze right before the release, to reduce the amount of frustration of our venerable ports team. (This of course implies that I trust people won't upgrade ports to new buggy versions right before the release, and it seems like everyone is exercising very good judgement in this respect.) Satoshi