Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:30:20 -0400 From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>, Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: STABLE support team [Was: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/finger finger.c] Message-ID: <20001003163020.B38472@jade.chc-chimes.com> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001003125150.04c7f3f0@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 12:59:54PM -0600 References: <39DA182C.C70ED553@originative.co.uk> <39D98B55.126DAFC4@originative.co.uk> <200010022227.PAA62603@freefall.freebsd.org> <39D92E08.E00CF2E4@owp.csus.edu> <20001002180303.A40584@freefall.freebsd.org> <39D98B55.126DAFC4@originative.co.uk> <200010031530.JAA26493@harmony.village.org> <20001003124008.A4892@netmonger.net> <200010031800.MAA27859@harmony.village.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20001003125150.04c7f3f0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 12:59:54PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
> I'd be glad to help. As someone in a similar position (I *cannot* adopt
> a branch for use on production servers before the .2 release), I've always
> been a strong advocate of keeping -STABLE patched against newly discovered
> problems.
Why does the version number matter? If we released a new version every two weeks,
would 4.2 still be production ready for you? What if 4.1.1 was called 4.2? Would you
run it?
People(not just Brett) need to look at features and benefits when deciding
what version to run, not some magical number that gets incremented every now
and then.
--
Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc.
billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001003163020.B38472>