Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 09:58:44 -0400 From: Bill Moran <wmoran@iowna.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RELENG_4_3 calls itself -RELEASE? Message-ID: <3B6BFF94.F11BBACE@iowna.com> References: <20010803135402.94163.qmail@web14001.mail.yahoo.com> <20010803114937X.jkh@freebsd.org> <01080403365700.00392@spatula.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Why not 4.4.1-RELEASE, 4.4.2-RELEASE, etc It's simple, to the point. Implies upgrades. Allows you to quickly determine exactly how current a particular system is with regards to patches, and follows long-standing conventions. Just my $.02 -Bill Andrew Boothman wrote: > > [Boy do I wish I hadn't started this now!] > On Friday 03 August 2001 7:49 pm, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > > I like -BEET. It's short, means nothing, and is red. What more could > > > you ask for? :P > > > > Indeed! Well put. Unless I hear truly strong and well-reasoned > > sentiments to the contrary, I will tag and document this as the > > 4.4-BEET branch when the time comes to create it. > > While I'm usually all for nonsensical names (my own machine is called > spatula), I think we should try and pick something related, but clear. > > How do we feel about 4.4-RELEASE-PATCH1, 4.4-RELEASE-p1 or 4.4-RELEASEp1 for > the first commit RELENG_4_4 and 4.4-RELEASE-p2 for the second.... ? > > This idea has already been mentioned by various other people, but seems to > have been largely ignored by the rest of the conversation which, quite > understandably, became more interested in vegetables and flightless birds. :-) > > I think this is the best option for several reasons : > > 1) It makes it clear that the version you are running is basically > 4.4-RELEASE plus 'something'. > > 2) We can tell at a glance whether you are patched against a spacific > vulnerability. Security advisories can say "patched in 4.4-RELEASE-p5 simply > type 'uname -r' to determine if your system has been updated since the > vulnerability was patched" > > My original problem with the concept with the -SECURITY name was that you > can't tell if you have been patched against something. Of course, just > calling it -SECURITY doesn't make it any more obvious, but the patch numbers > do make it obvious. > > So calling a system -BEET, as much as I like the name, only addresses one of > my original concerns. Patch numbers would address both. > > -- > Andrew Boothman <andrew@cream.org> > http://sour.cream.org > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message -- "Where's the robot to pat you on the back?" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B6BFF94.F11BBACE>