From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Jun 27 6: 6:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mail.the-i-pa.com (mail.the-i-pa.com [151.201.71.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 87DB537B407 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 06:06:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wmoran@iowna.com) Received: (qmail 25386 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2001 13:14:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO geekland) (151.201.71.193) by mail.the-i-pa.com with SMTP; 27 Jun 2001 13:14:28 -0000 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:04:41 -0400 Message-ID: <01C0FEE8.33512E80.wmoran@iowna.com> From: Bill Moran To: "'Chad R. Larson'" , Jordan Hubbard Cc: "juha@saarinen.org" , "joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us" , "stable@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: RE: Staying *really stable* in FreeBSD Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:04:40 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG [I'm going out on a limb here (using MS Outlook). I think I've got the formatting cleaned up, but if I don't, feel free to complain.] On Tuesday, June 26, 2001 5:11 PM, Chad R. Larson [SMTP:chad@DCFinc.com] wrote: > On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 02:34:03AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > As I said at the beginning, perhaps it's time to simply re-write the > > Handbook paragraph which inadvertently "sells" -stable as a solution > > for certain types of problems it was never meant to solve. > > Yes, the handbook paragraph was clearly written to suggest that if > you run a production machine you should track -STABLE **in leiu of > -CURRENT**, not as a general rule. That is, if you chose to track > anything at all, it should be -STABLE. I disagree completely. Did you read the handbook? If you are interested in tracking the FreeBSD development process, and you want early access to the features that will appear in the next ``point'' release of FreeBSD then you should consider following FreeBSD-STABLE. Tracking FreeBSD-STABLE also gives you easy access to security fixes for FreeBSD as they are released. However, you do not need to track FreeBSD-STABLE to do this, as every security advisory for FreeBSD explains how to fix the problem for the releases it affects. Seems pretty clear to me. If you're interested in the development process, or need a new feature, you should *consider* tracking stable. -STABLE is also a method for getting security fixes, although it is NOT the only method. Where exactly did you get the impression that -STABLE was for people who want to get all the bug fixes? > That should be easy to clarify. Looks clear to me already. -Bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message