From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Mar 17 19:48:57 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C325E14C29 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 19:48:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA99749; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 19:48:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: Kiril Mitev Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Confusion In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 17 Mar 1999 21:57:08 GMT." <99031722052900.11541@loki.idea.co.uk> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 19:48:37 -0800 Message-ID: <99747.921728917@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I beg to disagree. > > IIRC, the hype (sorry, true) was that 4.0 is the current branch & > 3.* is the stable branch.... IF one were to split hairs, one could say > that when 3.0 existed, is was -current, not -stable, but I dare say That's not splitting hairs at all, 3.0-RELEASE was released on the -current branch for very specific reasons and anyone who thought this mere "hair splitting" only served to significantly misinform themselves about what was going on. I've already clarified the role of the dot-zero release in other postings in -stable so I won't repeat myself here except to simply note that Mr. Mitev here has seriously and significantly missed the point if he dismissed that fact so lightly. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message