From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 8 19:49:03 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0525C106573C; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 19:49:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cliftonr@lava.net) Received: from outgoing01.lava.net (cake.lava.net [IPv6:2001:1888:0:1:230:48ff:fe5b:3b50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF708FC1D; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 19:49:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cliftonr@lava.net) Received: from malasada.lava.net (malasada.lava.net [64.65.64.17]) by outgoing01.lava.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2ED2D0087; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 09:49:00 -1000 (HST) Received: by malasada.lava.net (Postfix, from userid 102) id 65B9E153882; Sun, 8 Jun 2008 09:49:00 -1000 (HST) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 09:49:00 -1000 From: Clifton Royston To: Adrian Chadd Message-ID: <20080608194859.GC3049@lava.net> Mail-Followup-To: Adrian Chadd , FreeBSD Stable References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: 6.2; 6.3; EOL; combustible discussions X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 19:49:03 -0000 On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 10:17:20AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Ok everyone, I think thats enough about this for now. > > I think the developers and users have made their points clear, and > they're no going to agree any more (but they may agree less) over > time. Well, *please* don't assume all users agree with Jo. Some of us actually read the EOL date on 6.2, assumed it meant what it said, and made an informed decision to use 6.2 as the best candidate available at that date, even knowing we'd be forced to upgrade sooner rather than later. If as an admin/user I could give a message to the developers, it would be a very different one: I would like to one day see a -STABLE line, perhaps 8.x, perhaps later, which would by *design* be strong enough and incorporate enough flexibility in its core design that it could be continued for as many as 5 years of minor releases (rather than by *default* as 4.x was due to the difficulty of the SMP model transition and the 5.x stability problems.) If I knew that were an eventual development goal, I'd be even happier with the FreeBSD development team. I have no damn idea how to achieve that goal, and as a software developer I know it's ridiculously, insanely difficult to design to a goal like that, but I do think that continuation is one of the main factors behind the nostalgia for the 4.x line. -- Clifton -- Clifton Royston -- cliftonr@iandicomputing.com / cliftonr@lava.net President - I and I Computing * http://www.iandicomputing.com/ Custom programming, network design, systems and network consulting services