From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Dec 10 1:24:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from pooh.elsevier.nl (pooh.elsevier.nl [145.36.9.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F9DC15085 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 01:24:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from steve@pooh.elsevier.nl) Received: (from steve@localhost) by pooh.elsevier.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA00333; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:25:13 GMT (envelope-from steve) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <13992.944768179@cs.ucl.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:25:11 -0000 (GMT) From: "Steve O'Hara-Smith" To: Theo PAGTZIS Subject: Re: 3.2 -> 3.3-stable Cc: freebsd-stable , "Chris D. Faulhaber" Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 09-Dec-99 Theo PAGTZIS wrote: > > This is definetely a paradox... > > A stable which is not stable...what is it (enigma) ? > > This definitely proves once more my thought about the erroneous of the naming > convention and the semantics behind it..... > > My impression of a stable is that one develops something which has been > tested > to the extent that is stable, i.e won't crash unless you stress it to the > limits (whatever the limits are). Obviously this stable should need more > testing before one can promote it to RC or release candidate..It is only when > the release candidate has matured in terms of bug fixes that it could move up > to a RELEASE merging with the master branch and setting there a revertable > milestone. From release one could then spawn a new branch that would move for > the next version of stable---RC-----Release. In other words: > > 1) ----- (proposed) REL 3.2-----Stable 3.3-----RC 3.3----REL 3.3---Stable > 3.4---RC 3.4---REL 3.4---etc.. > whereas now the scheme is > > 2) ------ (currently) REL 3.2----Stable 3.2---RC 3.3---REL 3.3---Stable > 3.3----RC 3.4---REL 3.4---Stable 3.4----etc.. > Now look the situation of the crash of the stable 3.3 and try to place it in > one of the two schemes...which one is more reasonable for you...?????? The two schemes are identical apart from the name used between release and subsequent release candidate. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message