Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 00:39:04 +0930 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Chris Shenton <cshenton@it.hq.nasa.gov> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2.2-STABLE Message-ID: <199708261509.AAA00391@word.smith.net.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:00:51 -0400." <199708261400.OAA16902@wirehead.it.hq.nasa.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 15:45:14 -0700 > David Greenman <dg@root.com> wrote: > > dg> No, that is not what -stable is. The current head of each major > dg> branch that releases are cut from (e.g. 2.1.x, 2.2.x, and > dg> eventually 3.0.x) are refered to as "-stable" after the first > dg> release is cut. The designation -stable means "more stable than > dg> the most recent release on this branch". > > So would it be useful to create a CVSup target called "STABLE" or > "STABLE_2_2" instead of "RELENG_2_2"? No. RELENG_2_2 is the CVS branch tag which was peeled off -current to form the 2.2 branch; it is the tag from which all the 2.2.* releases will be derived. This is what happens when you let users that are used to being kept in the dark into contact with the development environment. The net result is generally beneficial, but the learning process can be painful. 8) mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708261509.AAA00391>