From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Aug 30 20:57:39 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id UAA20342
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:57:39 -0700
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA20336
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:57:35 -0700
Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin [198.145.90.34]) by Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA21422; Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:56:26 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.11/8.6.5) with SMTP id UAA20539; Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:58:22 -0700
Message-Id: <199508310358.UAA20539@corbin.Root.COM>
To: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.mt.net>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: /etc/disktab and stuff 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 30 Aug 95 21:32:13 MDT."
             <199508310332.VAA26359@rocky.sri.MT.net> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 20:58:21 -0700
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

(Jordan said:)
>Funny.  Someone, who's name I'll refrain from mentioning here, was
>just musing to me the other day that maybe we should just SKIP 2.1 and
>go to 2.2.. :-)

   That was me. I was joking of course, but there was a small element of
truth.

(Nate said:)
>clean it up.  If the FreeBSD 2.1 release sucks the big one, then it
>sucks the big one.  Hollering at them isn't going to change their mind
>about what they are doing.  We've all been doing this long enough to
>know the consequences of bad decisions.
>
>Finally, what is coming up is *NOT* the 2.1 release, but a 2.1-SNAP.
>I'd rather see the code in the tree so it can be tested in the SNAP for
>a longer period of time than to see if take 30 more days to get in and
>have a crappy install for 2.1.

   Yes, and I apologize for the 2.1 tree brokeness that Rod has complained
about. This is the product of a large amount of effort to get all the changes
in before the snapshot. It's very important that as many changes as possible
that we want to be in the release be in the next snapshot. We are trying to
get this release out the door, and dribbling in the changes will only delay
it by months more.
   ...and I'm still not done yet. I have to finish up the userland and then
return to merging kernel stuff. There are a pile of important fixes in
-current that must be in the release, and I haven't hardly touched the 2.1 
kernel yet.
   Anyway, I have too much to do and no time to argue about this. I intend to
strike a balance between stability, features, and release schedule. The
emphasis will be on stability, followed by release schedule, and features
last. I will make an effort to bring in improvements (fixes or features) if I
think they would make 2.1 a better release...so to those who want 2.1 to be a
release with "meat", don't worry, it'll will be plenty "meaty". :-)

-DG