Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:48:24 +0400 From: Pavel Timofeev <timp87@gmail.com> To: George Kontostanos <gkontos.mail@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: x.0 RELASE isn't for production. Message-ID: <CAAoTqfudOrXX5Dip40=SHsTNaQ%2BsO9H5gjB3tZbXMALPEvB0vw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BdUSypsDjUi-Yn%2Bj266q8QfdV6CfsXGVDA60uqa8OQbPiaHSg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAAoTqfsKhTN=UCL3HY=gR70qeL_j6G2=ETE9LDXSWeXymdOZoA@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2BdUSypsDjUi-Yn%2Bj266q8QfdV6CfsXGVDA60uqa8OQbPiaHSg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2011/10/15 George Kontostanos <gkontos.mail@gmail.com> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Pavel Timofeev <timp87@gmail.com> wrote: > > That's what most people think. > > > I think we hurry. Imo, BETA/RC period for !NEW! STABLE branch should be > > longer. Six months, for example. > > New STABLE branch is very important! > > IMHO different OS releases (Unix or not) are usually at the state of > FreeBSD current regarding stability. FreeBSD late BETA and early RC > are usually very stable. Therefore the approximate one month period > between the first beta and the release is adequate time. > > Many users are reluctant to follow stable because they have to go > through the wolrd && kernel procedure. Since freebsd-update exists as > a means of binary upgrading a system through releases, I don't think > that it would be a bad idea to be able to use is for stable as well. > Let's assume that we would have monthly minor releases something like > 9.0.1, 9.0.2 etc. That could ease the fear of .0 release. > It's not bad idea. > > This is coming from someone who is using current all the time for > workstations and stable for production servers and never uses > freebsd-update! > > Best Regards > > -- > George Kontostanos > aisecure.net >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAAoTqfudOrXX5Dip40=SHsTNaQ%2BsO9H5gjB3tZbXMALPEvB0vw>