Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:00:51 -0400 From: Chris Shenton <cshenton@it.hq.nasa.gov> To: dg@root.com Cc: rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, grog@lemis.com Subject: Re: 2.2-STABLE Message-ID: <199708261400.OAA16902@wirehead.it.hq.nasa.gov> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 25 Aug 1997 15:45:14 -0700" References: <199708252245.PAA04397@implode.root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 15:45:14 -0700 David Greenman <dg@root.com> wrote: dg> No, that is not what -stable is. The current head of each major dg> branch that releases are cut from (e.g. 2.1.x, 2.2.x, and dg> eventually 3.0.x) are refered to as "-stable" after the first dg> release is cut. The designation -stable means "more stable than dg> the most recent release on this branch". So would it be useful to create a CVSup target called "STABLE" or "STABLE_2_2" instead of "RELENG_2_2"? The RELENG and descriptions I've seen in the CVSup docs make it sound like it's the engineering release leading *up* to 2.2-RELEASE, rather than 2.2-RELEASE plus bug/security fixes which would make it stable. Sorry, I really didn't want to open up a can o' worms on this one again...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708261400.OAA16902>