From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Mar 13 15: 7: 3 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from studict.student.utwente.nl (studict.student.utwente.nl [130.89.220.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F7314F1D for ; Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:06:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lva@dds.nl) Received: from ren (ut127003.inbel.utwente.nl [130.89.127.3]) by studict.student.utwente.nl (8.8.6/MQT) with SMTP id AAA07523 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 00:06:33 +0100 (MET) Reply-To: From: "laurens van alphen" To: Subject: RE: What do people think of May 1st for a 3.2 release date? Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 00:06:33 +0100 Message-ID: <000401be6da6$234166c0$0a0010ac@ren.craxx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: <199903132208.AA24401@waltz.rahul.net> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Rahul wrote: > Just my opinion: The next major release of FreeBSD 3.x should be so > reliable and bug-free that sites can install it and have a high degree > of confidence that they won't need to apply any bug fixes for at least 6 > months. agreed. what's the point of having -stable and -current otherwise? don't tell us that bugs can't be predicted. you can (sort of) by not putting untested (or only half tested) features in there. -- laurens van alphen, craxx alphen@craxx.com, http://craxx.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message