From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 4 20:18:25 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 412E9772 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 20:18:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.scaleengine.net (beauharnois2.bhs1.scaleengine.net [142.4.218.15]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 191282BBD for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 20:18:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.1.1.1] (S01060001abad1dea.hm.shawcable.net [50.70.146.73]) (Authenticated sender: allanjude.freebsd@scaleengine.com) by mx1.scaleengine.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C28D17DC15 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 20:18:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <538F7F10.7070605@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 16:18:24 -0400 From: Allan Jude User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: There is currently no usable release of FreeBSD. References: <332D72DF-2225-40E2-B246-0786181AAB51@tony.li> <538F5FB5.9060008@FreeBSD.org> <20140604231432.a5581f5a50f8d7e1611f9736@systemdatarecorder.org> In-Reply-To: <20140604231432.a5581f5a50f8d7e1611f9736@systemdatarecorder.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="F9UsoSU69NNfOg5CPXjcGvJJjO78uIoPj" X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 20:18:25 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --F9UsoSU69NNfOg5CPXjcGvJJjO78uIoPj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2014-06-04 16:14, Stefan Parvu wrote: >=20 >> Is the problem actually that we're using the term "legacy", which some= =20 >> vendors use to mean "unsupported"? Perhaps we ought to say: >=20 > better approach: >=20 > stable: 8.4, 9.2, 10.0 > current: 11.0 >=20 > It should be clear listed what are the stable releases, can be many, an= d what are the > future releases as well. Simple keep two naming conventions for whats s= table and > ready for production and what is coming next. >=20 Technically, the branches are stable so it'd be: Releases: 10.0, 9.2, 8.4 Testing: 11-snapshot, 9.3 or something like that. s/Releases/Production/ --=20 Allan Jude --F9UsoSU69NNfOg5CPXjcGvJJjO78uIoPj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTj38TAAoJEJrBFpNRJZKf0FoP/3v/WsLWScOTboH9yGdz73DH 3x7Ieci3ITgAbbo08Cmmkw5dMUGNeCrynvEHK6XK76fMSjuLaMHEl86IB2ZVhjUv qgOu+6U4hKGxTg28D/sK5goXyi92HiSbEImFTcYylPuH22+YlVdG+EMqZGTVZoqs +ZNzDOKV2n/u5Rlxin4ryi3CMU9oUhcS4tbBE/fWijpPBKSWEltCUjneeOtqGm/G zLrtU8T0tOjkfJooAYyle8nzD4vUhkbOG2MrgNYwPdZpZipchLfYCDxg56N+r9lD SLnFv1DM2+/3wycRwISdnVEEbCfL465g3t5MTZ+B63QKPkejxrTpGEykJgKwH4en tpZxa9b4RF30n/I7G1bJOyMkGNpJK0CAv4jNb8l/N9gckLdWlV9SMbf2z+bZRDf9 6dOue33Pu8na5/vJKCRDiL0+KR+61/DPimoHDHUDsHNQXOMRiHQh1JDBfndT85/a WHYLoHgnq3rz23rk0j6TwxWSUfl9DR5G/0ioCZwPIjNtL/l/WISAR5D2NNo2YOgP 12liNeejlsik/xKD91JIjgyrG7iCYcruYPXIeHjy/m9/K9oVL/EHlb7WHtb3hk8q IyQN3rOURVP6bR2Zhy7pVf8RbLN3IhE6eNzYQFQIEvft4ycdLStHjEGUUWQVseqd XH6bXaYLzJ8xSHy9vlUX =L0fg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --F9UsoSU69NNfOg5CPXjcGvJJjO78uIoPj--