From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Jan 7 22:12: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from wcn4.wcnet.net (mail.wcnet.net [216.88.248.234]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A79150E3 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 22:11:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jestess@wcnet.net) Received: from wcnet.net [216.88.253.15] by wcn4.wcnet.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-5.05) id A50A40C300CE; Sat, 08 Jan 2000 00:11:22 -0600 Message-ID: <3876D48E.8046C35@wcnet.net> Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2000 00:09:18 -0600 From: John Estess Organization: compulsive or none, depending on the day X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.4 BSD forever? References: <010501bf5989$2c4b7ec0$0200000a@danco.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Dan O'Connor wrote: > > >Yes, FreeBSD is going to get past 4.4. As much as I admire your idea > >for its style, I think our release names are going to be selected more > >on their mathematic than their asthetic values. :-) > > What? An operating system who's version level actually means what it says? > Inconceivable! But what does the version number really mean? Very little. In a world where 3.1 precedes to 95 (MS), where 4 precedes 7 (Slackware), where original releases start with 5 or 6 (Mandrake and Suse, I believe - DQM), what do you think release numbers signify? Not much. I'm glad FreeBSD has the integrity to sequence their releases in a logical manner, but this isn't required, is somewhat unexpected, and is really boring. There is a certain amount of romance attached to the 4.4-BSD name. As far as designating a release, a name is only a name, whether it be a sequence number (4.4) or a real moniker (Reno). People will tend to know the current (usual meaning) distribution in either case, and that is what matters. I think a sequence that proceeds alphabetically by first letter makes just as much sense as a numerical scheme, but it also strongly associates FreeBSD with its roots in the minds of its uses and potential users, so along with being romantically nostalgic, it could be a marketing ploy. Besides, wouldn't Kirk M. and the other BSD grandpops just *%^& if their baby never made it past 4.4? Tribute or torture? Who knows? _/ _/_/_/ || John Estess _/ _/ _/_/ || jestess@wcnet.net _/_/_/ _/_/_/ || To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message