Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 14:49:15 +0200 (SAT) From: Reinier Bezuidenhout <rbezuide@oskar.dev.nanoteq.co.za> To: morten@seeberg.dk Cc: steve@pooh.elsevier.nl, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: is -STABLE really stable? Message-ID: <199912071249.OAA15528@oskar.dev.nanoteq.co.za> In-Reply-To: <033d01bf40af$e217ac80$1600a8c0@SOS> from Morten Seeberg at "Dec 7, 99 01:37:48 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > on STABLE?? > > It can be true, RELEASEs usually follow a beta test period during > which > > the commits are constrained somewhat. STABLE usually contains bug fixes > and > > features merged from current. > > So there is actually really no easy way to stay updated on a production > machine (which has to be stable at every cost), because RELEASE is the only > actual stable system known the everyday users? > > Since 3.0 has been out for about a year, why not make more "RELEASE" > versions during a year? Or just freeze a few snapshots during the STABLE > branch? There is a 3.3-RELEASE out ... which is a release :) 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?199912071249.OAA15528>