Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 16:46:56 -0230 From: Jonathan Anderson <jonathan@FreeBSD.org> To: Jason Hellenthal <jhellenthal@dataix.net> Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> Subject: Re: There is currently no usable release of FreeBSD. Message-ID: <538F70A8.4060904@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <662C363E-A16E-48B2-9FBF-D2D4AB81733C@dataix.net> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1406040944570.2120@kozubik.com> <332D72DF-2225-40E2-B246-0786181AAB51@tony.li> <538F5FB5.9060008@FreeBSD.org> <662C363E-A16E-48B2-9FBF-D2D4AB81733C@dataix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jason Hellenthal wrote:
> Legacy . . .
> /adjective/
> COMPUTING
> **
>
> 1.
> *1*.
> denoting software or hardware that has been superseded but is
> difficult to replace because of its wide use.
>
>
> What about that says unsupported ?
Sure, you're right about the dictionary definition, but in some usage
(including among certain folks who build, package and use a popular
open-source alternative to FreeBSD), people treat the word "legacy" as
synonymous with "obsolete". Perhaps they shouldn't, but many do, and the
original poster is trying to justify to the compliance-happy parts of an
organisation why it's ok to base a company's future on something
labelled as ${perceived-to-be-negative adjective}.
So, rather than use words that are unclear (people in this conversation
seem to have different perspectives on them), I suggest that we use
unambiguous language: "branch X will be supported until x/y/zz".
Jon
--
Jonathan Anderson
jonathan@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?538F70A8.4060904>