From owner-freebsd-stable  Wed Jun  5 23:48:21 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA07066
          for stable-outgoing; Wed, 5 Jun 1996 23:48:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA07061;
          Wed, 5 Jun 1996 23:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA29478; Wed, 5 Jun 1996 23:46:46 -0700 (PDT)
To: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>
cc: stable@FreeBSD.org, committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Status of -stable 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 05 Jun 1996 22:21:36 MDT."
             <199606060421.WAA24403@rocky.sri.MT.net> 
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 1996 23:46:46 -0700
Message-ID: <29476.834043606@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Anyway, I think -stable is now stable once again.

Thanks for posting the summary, Nate - I did indeed fall asleep!

Since Nate's already said pretty much everything I would have, let me
just add a brief post-mortem on what I've learned from all of this:

1. Merging in CVS when you have many changes is hard.  CVS was not
   designed with that kind of branch support in mind.

2. I'll never try something like that again. :-)

 Since we can't use CVS to maintain long-term branches, we have to
stop doing that.  With the next release of 2.1-stable (which will be
numbered "2.1.5") the 2.1-stable branch will be dead.  We will not
resurrect another -stable branch in its place, as previously planned,
and all development will take place in -current as it did before.  We
may do short term branch development leading up to each new release,
but nothing like the 15 month run of the 2.1-stable branch!  This has
simply been a nightmare and -stable has, at most, one or two more
months to live.

In the short-to-medium term we'll probably go back to our old model of
freezing 2.2 periodically and trying to get it released.  Should we
ever go to another source manager who's initials aren't C-V-S, we can
perhaps think about multi-branch support again.

					Jordan