Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 12:49:11 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6.0 and onwards Message-ID: <418CBA37.7060000@fer.hr> In-Reply-To: <418C78A4.2090607@freebsd.org> References: <120ef05304110520083d71e6a6@mail.gmail.com> <418C78A4.2090607@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote: > to come. Just because 6-STABLE gets branched on June 1 doesn't mean > that 5.x is dead or that 6.0 is immediately suitable for enterprise > work. It's just a stepping stone to having a 6.x release that is fully > capable. Though I agree with most of what was announced, I do have an objection about this part. I know (from the docs) that 4.0 was named -STABLE even if it did not contain some important features (kqueue? ipv6?), but at this time, a *lot* of people assume that naming a branch of FreeBSD -STABLE means it *is* ready for enterprise work. FreeBSD has gained a lot in popularity, and though engineers will know that -STABLE is just another designation, people who do the deciding won't. 6.0 probably shouldn't get labeled -STABLE unless it's completely ready to be used.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?418CBA37.7060000>