From owner-freebsd-current Mon Mar 17 04:28:39 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA07934 for current-outgoing; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 04:28:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from shrimp.dataplex.net (shrimp.dataplex.net [208.2.87.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA07928 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 04:28:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [208.2.87.4] (cod.dataplex.net [208.2.87.4]) by shrimp.dataplex.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA29152; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 06:28:21 -0600 (CST) X-Sender: rkw@shrimp.dataplex.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19970317093154.WS08508@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <199703170805.KAA00928@shadows.aeon.net>; from mika ruohotie on Mar 17, 1997 10:05:15 +0200 <199703170805.KAA00928@shadows.aeon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 06:28:24 -0600 To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) From: Richard Wackerbarth Subject: Which lists for discussion. Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) replies: >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. I can also argue that all 2.2 discussion has always been on "current" and never on "stable". Rather than move the 2.2 discussion, we could equally move the 3.0 discussion. Legacy is a poor excuse to continue a BAD decision. Although you point out that "seasoned" users might suffer confusion from a name change, I will argue that new users DO SUFFER from the present state of affairs. This in turn leads to a greater load on the group who repeatedly have to explain that "stable" is, at best shaky, and that the latest release is never "current". Although, at some time in the future, we might return to the use of the terms "stable" and "current" with a meaning that is more in line with their English meaning, the solution which avoids the ambiguity is to establish a new naming convention and transition everyone to it. We can even use Majordomo to help wean the "caught in a rut" old timers who cannot break the habit of sending mail to "current" by having it forward that mail to "2.2" and "3.0" and, at the same time, send a polite message back to the originator indicating that the list is deprecated.