From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Nov 22 20:14:22 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA07777
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 20:14:22 -0800 (PST)
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 UAA07769;
          Fri, 22 Nov 1996 20:14:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.2/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA24427; Fri, 22 Nov 1996 20:11:56 -0800 (PST)
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
cc: proff@suburbia.net (Julian Assange), sos@FreeBSD.org, rkw@dataplex.net,
        hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Nothing to do with PERL, time to change the subject.
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 22 Nov 1996 17:27:16 MST."
             <199611230027.RAA16284@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 20:11:56 -0800
Message-ID: <24425.848722316@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 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.

There is one HECK of a lot of difference.  Committers may commit
freely to -current, given reasonable standards for code quality
(e.g. it has to be a step forward and it has to compile - nobody
would settle for less).  Committers may NOT freely commit to -stable
or any release branch under development.  It may be technologically
possible, but definitely not allowed or encouraged.

> The only difference between the two at present, however, is the value
> of a branch tag.

You're not even close.

					Jordan