From owner-freebsd-current Mon Mar 17 00:34:57 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA29566 for current-outgoing; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 00:34:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA29561 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 00:34:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id JAA00816 for current@FreeBSD.ORG; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 09:34:51 +0100 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA04688; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 09:31:54 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <19970317093154.WS08508@uriah.heep.sax.de> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 09:31:54 +0100 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: panics? References: <199703170805.KAA00928@shadows.aeon.net> X-Mailer: Mutt 0.60_p2-3,5,8-9 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: <199703170805.KAA00928@shadows.aeon.net>; from mika ruohotie on Mar 17, 1997 10:05:15 +0200 Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As mika ruohotie wrote: > while i post, to me it sounds a nice idea to twiddle the naming like it > was suggested... > > 2.1.x stable > 2.2.x current > 3.0.x future (experimental?) Well, we've been referring to the experimental stuff as -current for all the time. I'm afraid it's simply too late switching paradigms now, since it would confuse the hell out of the users. -current has been declared to be experimental, even though it was often a fairly stable system, too. Right now it isn't (and it certainly won't be again for a while, we need to push new stuff into the tree in order to get it debugged before 3.0 can be done). 2.2 should become 2.2-stable. The tag `-stable' never really meant that the system was stable at all :), i remember that 2.1-stable was often less stable than (2.2)-current, due to being less used for some time. There's no conflict in keeping the name 2.1-stable for this branch as well, although, as 2.2-stable will mature, it will probably really finally die, as has been predicted so many times now. :) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)