From owner-freebsd-current Thu Sep 24 10:24:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05899 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Thu, 24 Sep 1998 10:24:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from bright.fx.genx.net (bright.fx.genx.net [206.64.4.154]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA05885 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 1998 10:24:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@hotjobs.com) Received: from localhost (bright@localhost) by bright.fx.genx.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA00872; Thu, 24 Sep 1998 13:25:16 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from bright@hotjobs.com) X-Authentication-Warning: bright.fx.genx.net: bright owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 13:25:16 -0500 (EST) From: Alfred Perlstein X-Sender: bright@bright.fx.genx.net To: Peter Wemm cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Andre Oppermann , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/3.0-19980923-BETA/ In-Reply-To: <199809241550.XAA21409@spinner.netplex.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > I'd prefer cvs-current and cvs-stable to numbered ones or we'll have > > to rename lists at the roll-over rather than simply transitioning the > > topics of discussion accordingly. > > Yes, but what about 2.2-stable and 3.0-stable and 3.1-current? :-) > > I seriously doubt that 2.2 branch development will just end because 3.0 is > released and becomes (at some point) the canonical -stable branch. 2.1.x > hung around for quite a while after 2.2 became 2.2-STABLE. not that i really have a voice in this, but i think 2.1.x went away because the freebsd team decided that it was too much to deal with. (3 trees) besideds, a make world of 3.0 source on 2.2.x should still work no? although you get certain "benifits" perl5, bind8... etc.. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message