Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:25:43 -0800
From:      Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        George Kontostanos <gkontos.mail@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Subject:   Re: Use of newest version number such as 10.0 instead of current
Message-ID:  <4EBDA0E7.4030707@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA%2BdUSyqwDy_AvaGkTcxPnT5tmxGF-x6Vg3va8uVTzmngRR%2BN1g@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAOgwaMv=wUb11AYwJ_RN1x1p0DGtZb6pJ4cb8R6v0ySYiNTjRw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1111111226010.882@multics.mit.edu> <CA%2BdUSyqwDy_AvaGkTcxPnT5tmxGF-x6Vg3va8uVTzmngRR%2BN1g@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/11/2011 14:23, George Kontostanos wrote:
> BTW I follow both stable and current lists. I have noticed that people
> still ask questions in current regarding 9-RC(*) problems.
> Maybe if it was clear that current is now 10 this would not happen.

Actually up until the actual release we encourage users to ask about the
new branch on -current, for a variety of reasons.


-- 

		"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
		"Too practical."

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EBDA0E7.4030707>