Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 15:54:02 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> To: Andreas Klemm <andreas@knobel.gun.de> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Minutes of the Thursday, April 13th core team meeting in Berkeley. Message-ID: <21302.798764042@freefall.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 23 Apr 95 20:19:20 %2B0200." <199504231819.UAA06506@knobel.GUN.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 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.
And again, that's exactly the intention.
Some people seem to be confusion regarding 2.1 and 2.0.5 ("So, since
you're doing 2.0.5, that means that 2.1 will be of lower quality?"
"NO!!!"). 2.0.5 is being done as an _INTERIM_ release. It's not 2.1,
it's not meant to be 2.1, it's meant simply to BUY US TIME to make 2.1
all it's supposed to be.
Most people don't realize that there are still many hundreds (exact
sales figures can't be disclosed) of FreeBSD 2.0R CDs going out each
week, and each 2.0R CD goes out is another customer who's going to be
fighting bugs we've already fixed. These interim releases are as
important to us in reducing -questions load as they are to WC, who
gets to answer all the tech support calls for FreeBSD (as I think many
people here are forgetting!).
Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21302.798764042>