From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Dec 17 19:58:06 1995
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id TAA27796
          for current-outgoing; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 19:58:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from linus.demon.co.uk (linus.demon.co.uk [158.152.10.220])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA27763
          Sun, 17 Dec 1995 19:57:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from mark@localhost) by linus.demon.co.uk (8.7.3/8.7.3) id DAA03733; Mon, 18 Dec 1995 03:40:34 GMT
Message-Id: <199512180340.DAA03733@linus.demon.co.uk>
From: mark@linus.demon.co.uk (Mark Valentine)
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 03:40:33 +0000
In-Reply-To: Julian Elischer's message of Dec 17, 11:42pm
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.6 alpha(3) 7/19/95)
To: current@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD-current-stable ???
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

I think the problem of a less-stable-than-usual -current is basically
self-fixing (users yell; contributors think about how they might improve
their testing), and requires no fundamental change in philosophy.

People should either run releases or snaps, or be prepared to help on
the debugging (how about enabling DDB by default in -current GENERIC?  ;-)
These choices are a wonderful part of this project.

I'm speaking as one who lives dangerously with -current on my only home
system, backup device at the ready, and very rarely has to boot /kernel.old
for a few days.

		Mark.