Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 20:28:37 -0400 From: "Matthew Emmerton" <matt@gsicomp.on.ca> To: <stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Releases Message-ID: <00b801c0c21e$5a1532c0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> References: <Pine.BSF.4.32.0104100522430.38514-100000@xeon.int.nz.freebsd.org> <014a01c0c12e$e5e76f20$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20010410145433.C20548@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 03:54:32PM -0400, Matthew Emmerton wrote: > > pre-alphas and totally trashed most systems and rightly freak out most > > novice admins), while STABLE/RC/RELEASE just makes sense. However, this > > You obviously haven't been reading all the threads on this same topic > over the past month. We need the "BETA" stage for ports. Plain and > simple. Some seem to prefer -PRERELEASE. I don't care what it is called > -- 4.3-I_AM_A_MORNON_BECAUSE_I_DO_NOT_RTFM would be fine too. Read the > archives to see why it is needed for ports right before a release. Do you read every thread on every topic? While reading through some of the other messages in this thread I figured out what the -BETA stage is used for, and in many cases, the name is appropriate, although it's confusing to people unfamiliar with the release process. As was previously mentioned, documenting this "black magic" release process is a tough thing to do. However, I'd be willing to solicit explanations of the release process from people who are familiar with it so that it can be documented, with appropriate references made to it where -STABLE is mentioned in the handbook. This is a first step into providing better documentation which we can arm ourselves with to point people at, in order to avoid discussions like this one from recurring. -- Matt Emmerton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00b801c0c21e$5a1532c0$1200a8c0>