Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 07:09:05 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Chris Dillon <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us> Cc: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>, jkh@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: NO MORE '-BETA' Message-ID: <20010316070905.U29888@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.32.0103160901230.18102-100000@mail.wolves.k12.mo.us>; from cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:03:27AM -0600 References: <XFMail.010317012235.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <Pine.BSF.4.32.0103160901230.18102-100000@mail.wolves.k12.mo.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Chris Dillon <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us> [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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010316070905.U29888>