From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Aug 4 6:58:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from clmboh1-smtp3.columbus.rr.com (clmboh1-smtp3.columbus.rr.com [65.24.0.112]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2049237B401 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 06:58:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wmoran@iowna.com) Received: from iowna.com (dhcp065-024-023-038.columbus.rr.com [65.24.23.38]) by clmboh1-smtp3.columbus.rr.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f74Dt2F20311 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:55:02 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3B6BFF94.F11BBACE@iowna.com> Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 09:58:44 -0400 From: Bill Moran X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RELENG_4_3 calls itself -RELEASE? References: <20010803135402.94163.qmail@web14001.mail.yahoo.com> <20010803114937X.jkh@freebsd.org> <01080403365700.00392@spatula.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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 > 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