From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Jun  7 06:29:51 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA14513
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 06:29:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA14470;
          Fri, 7 Jun 1996 06:29:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA15554; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 06:29:35 -0700 (PDT)
To: grog@lemis.de (Greg Lehey)
cc: hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD Hackers),
        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org (FreeBSD Stable Users),
        FreeBSD-current@freebsd.org (FreeBSD current users)
Subject: Re: The -stable problem: my view 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 07 Jun 1996 12:15:38 +0200."
             <199606071015.MAA00708@allegro.lemis.de> 
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 1996 06:29:35 -0700
Message-ID: <15552.834154175@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I buy most of Jordan's arguments about getting rid of -stable (though
> I'm not sure why CVS should be the problem.  Sure, I don't like it
> either, but the way I see it, that's mainly a problem of
> documentation), and so I'm not going to argue against killing -stable,

Try using it _seriously_ someday and no explanation will be necessary.
Suffice it to say that it has absolutely nothing to do with the
documentation.

						Jordan