Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 16:32:56 -0700 (PDT) From: John Kozubik <john@kozubik.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: There is currently no usable release of FreeBSD. Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1406041627190.2120@kozubik.com> In-Reply-To: <19839.1401922026@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1406040944570.2120@kozubik.com> <18771.1401901640@critter.freebsd.dk> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1406041316440.2120@kozubik.com> <19839.1401922026@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >>>> Let's pretend for a moment that you are going to use FreeBSD for >>>> something other than FreeBSD development. Let's pretend that you have >>>> customers and shareholders and boardmembers and contracts and >>>> regulators. > > And that's exactly why I'd start with -current. By the time you're > ready to go live, it will be -stable. > > If you start at 8, 9 or 10 now, you'll be overdue to upgrade by the > time you go live. I agree that the releases do not last long enough to settle on and grow into. That is why we *need* a release to go into double-digit minors, like 4 did when it went to 4.11. I don't even care which one! Any of them! Just give us a release that we can grow into and not find ourselves at "legacy" two years later, at 9.2. Which, by the way, is actually a step backwards. I was appalled to find that 8 was marked legacy at 8.3, but now 9 is marked legacy at 9.2. Which means if there is some bug in 'em' or 'twa' and it gets fixed in 10, you'll never see it backported to 9. Be honest.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1406041627190.2120>