Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 11 Nov 1999 16:56:31 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
To:        Theo PAGTZIS <T.Pagtzis@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ambiguity between -STABLE and -RELEASE 
Message-ID:  <199911112356.QAA14514@harmony.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 08 Nov 1999 22:53:44 GMT." <1483.942101624@cs.ucl.ac.uk> 
References:  <1483.942101624@cs.ucl.ac.uk>  

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <1483.942101624@cs.ucl.ac.uk> Theo PAGTZIS writes:
: In that sense I would recommend some change in the naming (or rather 
: numbering) convention which in my book should be
: 
: 3.2-RELEASE -> 3.3-STABLE -> 3.3-RC -> 3.3-RELEASE -> 3.4-STABLE
: 
: and NOT
: 
: 3.2-RELEASE -> 3.2-STABLE -> 3.3-RC -> 3.3-RELEASE -> 3.3-STABLE

I don't follow your logic.  What we have works and the -FOO meanings
are a) arbitrary in a vacuum and b) well defined in FreeBSD.  There is
no point in changing them.

3.4 doesn't exist until 3.4-release happens.  Naming things 3.4 stable
just after 3.3 release would be too confusing.  The -RC stuff is just
for a few days, so doesn't cause much confusion since it is Really
Close to 3.4.

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911112356.QAA14514>