From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Nov 22 16:42:43 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA00292
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 16:42:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA00287;
          Fri, 22 Nov 1996 16:42:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id RAA16284; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 17:27:16 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199611230027.RAA16284@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: Who needs Perl? We do!
To: proff@suburbia.net (Julian Assange)
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 17:27:16 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, sos@FreeBSD.ORG, rkw@dataplex.net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199611230023.LAA26899@suburbia.net> from "Julian Assange" at Nov 23, 96 11:23:16 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Sometimes keeping contributors happy and contributing is more
> important than quality control styles, and was why I thought we had a
> -current vs -stable.

I definitely agree with this statement.

How is it being implemented?  The -current vs -stable dichotomy is
not enough to let people push ahead ignoring some of the bad decisions
Lite2 made.  Good having to get in line behind bad only codifies bad
and disenfranchises good...

If there were a difference between "core-current" and "core-stable"
and/or "committers-current" and "committers-stable", I might agree
with you that the -current vs -stable dichotomy addresses the issue.
The only difference between the two at present, however, is the value
of a branch tag.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.