Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 19 Mar 1999 15:07:01 -0700
From:      Jonathan Frazier <wolfnet@wolfnet-irc.org>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Confusion
Message-ID:  <36F2CA85.4FA9D8E5@wolfnet-irc.org>
References:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.990318230049.3551A-100000@nefertiti.lightningweb.com> <36F267F2.627CC555@halcyon.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sone of you aren't getting this concept I guess.  This is not new...this is how
all software is produced, it's just called different names.  Just as Microsoft
has their Betas, FreeBSD had -CURRENT.  Just as Microsoft puts it on disk,
FreeBSD has -RELEASE.  Just as Microsoft then fixes their bugs they didn't find
in the betas and issue patchs and version 'b', FreeBSD has -STABLE.  It's
nothing new and it's nothing to argue over.  Comparing 3.0-RELEASE to 2.8-STABLE
is like comparing Windows 98 to Windows 95b with all the patches.....The only
real difference is that unlike Microsoft, FreeBSD produces a quality operating
system with real stability.  -STABLE doesn't neccesarily mean that the others
are not "STABLE".  Even when I ran -CURRENT (betas) I was ALWAYS 10 times more
stable then any MS OS I have ever used in my life.  This discussion is not about
a newbies choice of versions, more of ignorance of the newbie.  They should do
just like any use of any OS and get the disk. (-release)  Then after they learn
more about it and are able to run it, then they can think about running other
variations.  I do see what you all are saying though.  Let me leave you with
these last words:

"As many people have somewhat bitterly pointed out by now, this business
has become a 10% technology and 90% perception equation as far as the
direction in which people stampede is concerned, and hate them for the
mindless little sheep that they are, you still need to understand people's
tendencies and behavioral patterns when it comes to dealing with anything
they don't really understand.  We've done a great job on the technology,
we really have (and should be proud of that), but all too frequently we
just throw up our hands over the perception issue and tell people to think
whatever the hell they want to." (Jordan K. Hubbard, FreeBSD)

I think this more or less describes the issue at hand.  The consumer doesn't
understand.  so let them buy the release or download whatever release they
want.  I would recommend ANY of the FreeBSD versions -RELEASE or -STABLE.  Then
once they have an idea about what they are doing...they can make the decision
for themselves.  I just don't think it's really a stability issue at this point.

Jonathan


David C. Jenner wrote:

> This guy is absolutely correct.  The designations RELEASE, STABLE,
> and CURRENT, what they mean, and the targeted audience of each are
> exceedingly confusing.
>
> You (FreeBSD experts who intimately know what you are doing) are cooking
> your own goose.  If it's your goal to have your own, private enclave
> of FreeBSD users, you're doing great.  If you want to spread the good
> word, you're shouting into a paper bag.
>
> Dave



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?36F2CA85.4FA9D8E5>