Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:52:24 +0000 From: David Murphy <drjolt@redbrick.dcu.ie> To: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: dot-0 releases Message-ID: <20000322165223.K48595@enigma.redbrick.dcu.ie> In-Reply-To: <200003221610.LAA20341@blackhelicopters.org>; from mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org on Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 11:10:21AM -0500 References: <200003221610.LAA20341@blackhelicopters.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting <200003221610.LAA20341@blackhelicopters.org> by Michael Lucas <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org>: > If you're an experienced sysadmin, upgrading from source is no big > deal. If you're less experienced, then it is a big deal. The > documentation can't tell anyone if they personally should upgrade > from source. If you are an experienced <blink>FreeBSD</blink> sysadmin, then upgrading from source is no big deal. The assumption that people are either experienced FreeBSD admins, or they are completely clueless about unix, while apparently widely made by experienced FreeBSD admins, is *not* valid. The documentation should, of course, aim to teach everyone, but I suggest an intermediate target to aim for: teaching the experienced, skilful systems administrator unfamiliar with FreeBSD about FreeBSD's particular quirks. It would also greatly help if the people who write the manuals [Handbook, Release Notes and Release Announcements] and the people who make pronouncements on mailing lists such as these synced up a little. What I mean is, the clueful sysadmin new to FreeBSD will RTFM. They will then proceed based on that info. Example: If TFM only talks about upgrading from source, the clueful sysadmin will believe that upgrading from source is the way to upgrade. [NB, the handbook only talks about upgrading from source]. The clueful sysadmin should not then be told that upgrading from source is the not recommended for those who are not experienced <blink>FreeBSD</blink> sysadmins. Please decide on a recommendation, and put it in TFM (handbook). Please announce this on -stable, so people on stable can at least say if they're quoting "official policy" or their own personal policy. Example: If TFM designates something as a .0 release, the clueful sysadmin will treat it as such. [NB, the release notes and release annoucement designate 4.0-RELEASE, as opposed to 4.0-RC]. The clueful sysadmin should not then be told that .0 is still a release candidate. Please decide on a designation, and put it in TFM (release notes and release announcement). Please announce this on -stable, so people on stable can at least say if they're quoting "official policy" or their own personal policy. Please stop flaming people to a crisp for being able to RTFM, but not being able to Read Your F'ing Minds. -- When asked if it is true that he uses his wheelchair as a weapon he will reply: "That's a malicious rumour. I'll run over anyone who repeats it." Stephen Hawking - [http://www.smh.com.au/news/0001/07/features/features1.html] David Murphy - For PGP public key, send mail with Subject: send-pgp-key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000322165223.K48595>