Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:38:26 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Devin Teske <devin.teske@fisglobal.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle Message-ID: <4F169312.5040006@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <03a901ccd56d$09eb2a20$1dc17e60$@fisglobal.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1112211415580.19710@kozubik.com> <1326756727.23485.10.camel@Arawn> <CAGH67wS3mvPCBKG36iQ8qtA89GGk1r3KEp4QHj6nt8y9nB8uEA@mail.gmail.com> <03a901ccd56d$09eb2a20$1dc17e60$@fisglobal.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 18/01/2012 01:09 Devin Teske said the following: > I'm ready to say that the 9-series should instead be the "chosen > outlier" when it comes to picking one single release to have an ultra-wide > lifecycle. But how can you say that without knowing what will (can) come in 10. Maybe it will have something that would be a complete re-write, but something that you would super-want. IMO, it's the whole purpose of our present stable branches policy to let users try/test/use new/advanced features sooner, all while having a choice. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F169312.5040006>