Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2008 22:18:35 +0200 (CEST) From: sthaug@nethelp.no To: jrhett@netconsonance.com Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 Message-ID: <20080607.221835.74664729.sthaug@nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: <2892DF94-B346-4F36-9D32-165A2EA462D1@netconsonance.com> References: <80D7EE2D-A970-407B-A42C-AD17500BC463@netconsonance.com> <861w3cf2pj.fsf@ds4.des.no> <2892DF94-B346-4F36-9D32-165A2EA462D1@netconsonance.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I'd said nearly a dozen times that the issues I have aren't > specifics. I am questioning the overall policy for EoL here. Even if > it was known to work properly on my hardware the overwhelming amount > of bugs in 6.3 indicates an unstable release. No. 6.3 is very stable for us, on multiple machines. So is 7.0. And I have seen lots of other users basically saying the same thing. *You* are the one claiming that "the overwhelming amount of bugs in 6.3 indicates an unstable release" - yet you are unwilling to test 6.3 and you are also unwilling to show the PRs you claim exist. My sympathy for such a view is limited. Personally, I'm very happy with the work that the developers have put in and are *continuing* to put in. However, I'm just a user, not a developer. I have occasionally contributed bug fixes to FreeBSD, which is *my* best waying of returning the favor of all of the persons who have spent countless hours, often unpaid, to make FreeBSD a better system. I hope they continue! Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080607.221835.74664729.sthaug>