Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 10:26:50 -0500 From: Christopher Schulte <christopher@schulte.org> To: "Matthew Emmerton" <matt@gsicomp.on.ca>, "Rasputin" <rara.rasputin@virgin.net>, <stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Releases Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010409101533.00ace930@pop.schulte.org> In-Reply-To: <001b01c0c106$a897f770$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> References: <030e01c0c0fb$52b2fcc0$340410ac@JRAFTERY> <200104091358.JAA13889@sjt-u10.cisco.com> <20010409154800.A24937@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:06 AM 4/9/2001 -0400, Matthew Emmerton wrote: >[ On a related note, -CURRENT seems to suggest the wrong thing. I've had >the unlucky experience of recovering production boxes (!!) that previous >admins had decided to update to -CURRENT because, hey, it must be the best >code, right? IMHO, -CURRENT should be -DEV. That's a pretty clear >indication that it shouldn't be run on production boxes. ] Change the designation just because some admins don't know how to RTFM? I don't think so... They fu*ked up. Plain and simple. -CURRENT makes sense, and more importantly is documented for those who take the time to look. I'm not as hot about the BETA designation, but generally feel it should be left alone simply because it's documented, and thus should NOT be a problem. *sigh* My position may change on this topic. >-- >Matt Emmerton --chris 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?5.0.2.1.0.20010409101533.00ace930>