From owner-freebsd-security Fri Oct 6 7: 0: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from gw.nectar.com (gw.nectar.com [208.42.49.153]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB68637B502 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 07:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ophelia.nectar.com (ophelia.nectar.com [10.5.5.2]) by gw.nectar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E33D21925E; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:00:05 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nectar@localhost) by ophelia.nectar.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA01468; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:01:38 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from nectar@spawn.nectar.com) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:01:38 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Brett Glass Cc: Warner Losh , security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Stable branch Message-ID: <20001006090138.B1410@ophelia.nectar.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005105420.04a7b540@localhost> <20001004220906.D50210@dragon.nuxi.com> <200010051830.MAA01024@harmony.village.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005173257.048b9f00@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005173257.048b9f00@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 05:36:56PM -0600 X-Url: http://www.nectar.com/ Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [Dropped freebsd-developers, since it isn't an open list. Unfortunately, this doesn't really belong on freebsd-security either, but I don't care to move it now.] On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 05:36:56PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: > Personally, I would equate "-SOLID" with "suitable for production > machines" whereas -STABLE would be "OK for application developers > and eager/early adopters but still settling down to the confidence > level of -SOLID." > > Which might imply setting things up so that the -STABLE branch > becomes -SOLID after, say, a good .2 release. Two ideas that are related only by the fact that I am skeptical of the feasibility of yet another branch maintained by our volunteers: 1. A -SOLID or -BUGFIX branch sounds to me like a business opportunity to me. 2. I wonder about the feasibility of another tag on the -STABLE branch that follows behind RELENG_4. It may be easier to identify the last-known-excellent point on -STABLE than to maintain another branch. I should also note that I, personally, think that productions systems should run -RELEASE, plus locally applied hot-fixes. Yes, I realize that many shops may not have the expertise to do this. See (1). -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message