From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Mar 16 7: 9:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4939437B718; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 07:09:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f2GF95E13422; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 07:09:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 07:09:05 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Chris Dillon Cc: "Daniel O'Connor" , jkh@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Jordan Hubbard , Steve Kargl Subject: Re: NO MORE '-BETA' Message-ID: <20010316070905.U29888@fw.wintelcom.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:03:27AM -0600 X-all-your-base: are belong to us. Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Chris Dillon [010316 07:03] wrote: > On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > > On 16-Mar-01 Chris Dillon wrote: > > > 4.3-BETA at this time. I get the usual "BETA!?!?" response, whereby I > > > have to explain that FreeBSD's "BETA" is nothing like, say, > > > Microsoft's "BETA". I don't think its a big problem, just that it > > > > Heh.. actually it is.. > > > > MS run RC's and Beta's too. > > I'm referring to the code quality and general usefullness of the > "BETA". To me, FreeBSD's "BETA" is just another term for "-STABLE in > a code freeze because we're just about to do a release", not "a buggy > piece of crap". I thought it was the "MS" that implied "buggy piece of crap" not the "BETA", but I could see how our users would be confused. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message