From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 10 02:16:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2836016A403 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:16:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scrappy@freebsd.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9FE043D45 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:16:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06DF3291AFE; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 23:16:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30942-07; Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:16:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (blk-137-86-60.eastlink.ca [24.137.86.60]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC43290C74; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 23:16:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1027) id 8943833D53; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 23:16:29 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 887B133C25; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 23:16:29 -0300 (ADT) Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 23:16:29 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" X-X-Sender: freebsd@ganymede.hub.org To: Mark Andrews In-Reply-To: <200609100159.k8A1xAIn089481@drugs.dv.isc.org> Message-ID: <20060909231448.E1031@ganymede.hub.org> References: <200609100159.k8A1xAIn089481@drugs.dv.isc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?! X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 02:16:31 -0000 This should be documented somewhere clearly then, as my understanding was that -STABLE meant that anything MFCd back to it *was* tested and deemed stable ... and yes, I do run stable, and yes, I do expect to hit the occasional 'oopses', but "blantant and obvious bugs due to insufficient testing", IMHO, doesn't classify as an 'oops' .... On Sun, 10 Sep 2006, Mark Andrews wrote: > >> Yeah, -STABLE is what you should run if you want stable code, right? > > No. STABLE means STABLE API. > > If you want stable code you run releases. Between releases > stable can become unstable. Think of stable as permanent > BETA code. Changes have passed the first level of testing > in current which is permanent ALPHA code. > > Most of the time beta code is perfectly fine to run but > occasionally things will go wrong. The point of BETA code > is to catch those errors that escape detection in the ALPHA > stage before they make it into a release. That is done by > having a wider diversity of clients run the BETA code. > > Occasionally you have bugs that make it through both the ALPHA > and BETA stages. > > Mark > -- > ISC Training! October 16-20, 2006, in the San Francisco Bay Area, > covering topics from DNS to DHCP. Email training@isc.org. > -- > Mark Andrews, ISC > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@isc.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664