Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:48:44 -0500 (CDT) From: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> To: dg@root.com Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, jdw@wwwi.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: IP bugs in FreeBSD 2.1.5 Message-ID: <199610161348.IAA27595@brasil.moneng.mei.com> In-Reply-To: <199610160922.CAA04915@root.com> from "David Greenman" at Oct 16, 96 02:22:01 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> I am curious to know if -core has an opinion on where the line should > >> be (or maybe even has been) drawn. > > > >I would expect that they do (Jordan has hinted that discussions are going > >on, which is a positive sign). > > We're still talking about it. Right now we still intend to release a 2.1.6 > in December, but we are also considering releasing 2.2 at about the same time. > With all the nifty stuff like SMP, we want to move along towards 3.0. No > concrete decisions have yet been made, but we all would like to see the > technology in -current enjoy wider use and this plan seems to have wide > acceptence. Hi David, This would be, IMHO, an excellent path to follow. 2.1.5 (to become 2.1.6) is very obviously a highly polished product, and for many of us would continue to be the "OS of choice" for quite some time, for those demanding, high availability applications.. On the other hand, some of us are anxious enough to actually TRY 2.2R that we will trade stability for new features. I myself have some boxes that sit in "critical but redundant" positions and would certainly be willing to put 2.2R to the test - IF something were available. I mean, I did run a production news server on 2.0R, and I am quite familiar with the problems of running a "mostly stable" release. I did not mind the weekly freakouts or lockups too much, as I knew my problem reports would help make 2.0.5R a more reliable release. But I am not willing to try to track -current as it is just really hard to do (I'm one guy, I don't have the hours in the day as it is)... and the SNAP releases seem to be both bad and good... I have been tempted to look at Karl's MCS releases. If I could get a -current that was not so subject to such reliability variances, I would certainly run it. That's why the 2.2R thing seems like such a good idea. If a new "-stable" is created at 2.2R, and "-current" goes its merry way on to 3.0R, that gives people like me a good solid point at which to start, and a path to follow for the next year or two while 2.2.XR becomes as stable as 2.1.5R. It sounds like something along these lines is just exactly what is needed. Thanks for the info, ... JG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610161348.IAA27595>