Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:50:38 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Andreas Tobler <andreast-list@fgznet.ch> Cc: freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: 8.0-stable/releng? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0908141443070.82989@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <4A847AA5.1030701@fgznet.ch> References: <4A847AA5.1030701@fgznet.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Andreas Tobler wrote: > for the record, am I correct that the upcoming 8.0 branch is like this: > > svn ls svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/stable/ .. 8/ ? > > And not under 'releng'? > > I'm a bit confused about naming conventions, releng vs. stable. I have no > problem with either, but which one is the one to be used for BETA-3/RC? > > Is head becoming 9.0 soon? Existing documentation about branch naming (-CURRENT, -STABLE, -RELEASE, etc) remains essentially valid. The primary change of note is that in Subversion, we now include "stable" in the branch name for -STABLE branches, rather than using "releng" for that as well. The following should apply: base/head - -CURRENT base/stable/X - X-STABLE branches base/releng/X.Y - X.Y release engineering branches base/release/X.Y.Z - X.Y.Z release tag stable/8 has been created, but neither releng/8.0 nor release/8.0.0 have been created. Because the release process involves some non-atomic windows, things are currently potentially confusing -- uname -a on head and stable/8 both report BETA2, and the two branches are being kept in lock-step in the lead-up to BETA3, after which point the brannches will diverge. I'm not quite sure when head will start calling itself 9-CURRENT, but probably pretty soon. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0908141443070.82989>