Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 12:09:07 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NO MORE '-BETA' Message-ID: <20010316120906.D29888@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <200103161946.MAA16289@usr02.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 07:46:48PM %2B0000 References: <p05010404b6d806171fd8@[128.113.24.47]> <200103161946.MAA16289@usr02.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
My main objection is to the newvers.sh change that happens right
before the next -release, anyhow here's some suggestions:
* Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> [010316 11:57] wrote:
> > I've only been following freebsd for two or three years, but every
> > single time freebsd starts ramping up for a release I see some newbie
> > freebsd users come on "lily" (our equivalent of IRC) and say
> > "Hey, I meant to get N.x-stable, but I got N.x+1-beta!!
> > What did I do wrong? How do I back out?"
> >
> > It only takes a few minutes to calm them down and say "that's
> > just the way freebsd does things, don't worry about it", but it
> > does happen (with different people, of course) for every release
> > that I've seen.
> >
> > How about calling it:
> > 4.3-pre-release
> >
> > When we then create a new branch after the release (the "super
> > stable, critical bug-fixes only" branch), we can call that
> > 4.3-post-release
>
>
> -stable
> -release
> -stable-rc (stable, release candidate)
>
> The people with the problems may wonder about the "-rc" suffix,
> but with "stable" there as a prefix, they will probably ignore
> it, after wondering for a second whether it's the initials of
> the last person to commit changes or something...
Yes, people are used to seeing something like:
Linux-2.2.3232.2.2-STABLE+alc+spiff
^^^^^^
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:16:02AM -0800, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
>
> Well, there are two different things here though:
>
> 1. The usage of "BETA" to denote some pre-release collection of bits
> on an FTP site.
>
> 2. The usage of BETA in newvers.sh
>
> I think it's #2 which is actually causing all the problems here and I
> would happily forgo changing newvers.sh until it's time for the actual
> release. I don't usually mark it BETA myself, but one of my helpers
> here jumped the gun this time. :)
Yes, the real problem with this is '2' (newvers.sh), there's nothing
wrong with using 'BETA' in the names on the ftp site.
So either quit doing '2' or use a variant of
Terry's suggestion '-stable-rc'
~ % uname -srm
FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE-RC i386
Would be a lot less scary than -BETA.
--
-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?20010316120906.D29888>