Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 03:03:37 -0800 From: Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@rahul.net> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What do people think of May 1st for a 3.2 release date? Message-ID: <199903151103.AA17270@waltz.rahul.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I wrote: Just my opinion: The next major release of FreeBSD 3.x should be so reliable and bug-free that sites can install it and have a high degree of confidence that they won't need to apply any bug fixes for at least 6 months. "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> writes: That's a fine general thing to want, but it still tells me nothing about scheduling and that's what this thread is all about. :) Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> writes: That sounds like a wonderful idea. Are you volunteering the labour to help achieve this goal? You folks have really put me in my place. :-) Please consider the variables: Labor available: Finite, can't be easily increased. Software quality: Can be increased, but only at the cost of features. Scheduling: Flexible. Nomenclature: Flexible. If you first decide upon a date for the next 3.x-RELEASE, then you must accept whatever software quality is available in time for that date. Why not, instead, pick a level of software quality, and then follow whatever release schedule it takes to achieve that? Ok, I understand that people using 3.0-RELEASE and 3.1-RELEASE might need some urgent bug fixes. Intermediate bug-fix releases could still occur, called by names such as 3.x-SNAP or 3.x-INTERIM. But the next 3.x-RELEASE should be rock-solid and cause those who use FreeBSD for the first time to be ecstatic about FreeBSD. And it would be better to wait however long it takes to achieve that. -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@spams.r.us.com> 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?199903151103.AA17270>