Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 15:54:51 -0700 From: "Jason Watkins" <jwatkins@firstplan.com> To: "Stable" <stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Staying *really stable* in FreeBSD Message-ID: <JBEOKPCEMKJLMJAKBECCGENKDBAA.jwatkins@firstplan.com> In-Reply-To: <15155.29806.145760.832648@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> If the problem is instead that STABLE isn't STABLE enough and RELENG doesn't move fast enough - though evidence for the latter would also seem to be in short supply - then one of those two problems should be attacked, rather than trying to automate something that experience shows doesn't automate well. Thanks mike. I didn't mean to criticise anyone, I just mean that the root problem here is -stable isn't always stable. Although adding another tag would provide another buffer layer, I personally feel it's missing the point. Somewhere, someone has to approve moving things from -current to -stable, and figuring out how to better equip those people is what I think would bring about the best situation. I definately think life is easyer when you rebuild the system every month or 2 on a reasonable schedual instead of letting changes accumulate until it becomes a day long affair. 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?JBEOKPCEMKJLMJAKBECCGENKDBAA.jwatkins>