From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Apr 10 7:27:30 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mail5.nc.rr.com (fe5.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4651337B43E for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 07:27:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bts@babbleon.org) Received: from babbleon.org ([66.26.250.181]) by mail5.nc.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.537.53); Tue, 10 Apr 2001 08:27:02 -0400 Message-ID: <3AD2FBFA.ADDF188C@babbleon.org> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 08:26:34 -0400 From: The Babbler Organization: None to speak of X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" Cc: Yann Sommer , stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why not stick with [STABLE] [Was: RE: Releases] References: <4.3.2.20010410012424.02b2f580@207.227.119.2> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Jeffrey J. Mountin" wrote: : : > Fact is what friggin difference does make what the build calls > itself. Those that track the RELENG_4 branch should know that it doesn't > matter what it calls itself when doing a uname, it is the same branch at > different points or periods of time. > > The concept of how the naming is done is not an issue and cannot be solved > by using a different or modified scheme. Rather the documentation should > cover this. Just a matter of explaining what each period means in the > handbook and/or/both the FAQ... On principle, yes. I am new to FreeBSD (well, "new again"; I used it in 1995ish but back then tracking stable was out of the question owing to my poor net connections; I upgraded when Walnut Creeek released the new CD), and I read the handbook and subscribed to the list and it never caused me a moments consternation when the name changed. BUT the endless questions in the list about the name have really gotten even on *my* nerves; it must be driving the long-time regulars bonkers. The idea of changing the label was to try to do something to forestall the number of dumb questions from those who apparently can't be bothered to read and pay attention. Of course, they don't "deserve" help, but the loyal readers of the lists *do* deserve reliefe from the repeated questions, and if changing the label can give it to us, it seems sensible to me to change the labels. As you said "what friggin difference does [it] make what the build calls itself?" -- so if the veterens don't care what the label is, why not make it into something that will forestall pointless questions from the clueless newbies? The recent update to UPDATING will hopefully forestall some of them, but a change to the label seems to me like a pretty useful proposal, if everybody can agree on what to chnage it *to*. After alll, it's the label that's causing the confusion & spurious traffic, so that's the place to tackle the problem if we want to address the problem at its source. -- "Brian, the man from babble-on" bts@babbleon.org Brian T. Schellenberger http://www.babbleon.org Support http://www.eff.org. Support decss defendents. Support http://www.programming-freedom.org. Boycott amazon.com. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message