From owner-freebsd-security Sat Oct 7 16:52:48 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from citusc17.usc.edu (citusc17.usc.edu [128.125.38.177]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D52137B503; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 16:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from kris@localhost) by citusc17.usc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA17131; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 16:53:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 16:53:22 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Robert Watson Cc: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" , "Matthew D. Fuller" , Jordan Hubbard , John Baldwin , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Stable branch Message-ID: <20001007165322.A17115@citusc17.usc.edu> References: <4.3.2.20001007161924.00b72460@207.227.119.2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from rwatson@FreeBSD.org on Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 06:51:23PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 06:51:23PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote: > You seem to misunderstand. No one is asking the majority of committers to > commit to the release branches--in fact, that was specifically > *prohibited* in the recommendation of a branch for each release. These > branches would only exist for the purposes of release-related activity > (modify the version numbers in the release branch, not the -STABLE > branch), emergency back-ports during and immediately after the release > itself, ERRATA entries for the release,and for security bugfixes. No new > features. No new documentation work. Show stopper fixes only. You know, I'm starting to think this could actually work. I have no idea of the impact it would have on CVS though - Peter? Kris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message