From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 24 09:25:07 2007 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 CA5A616A41A for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:25:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from byshenknet@byshenk.net) Received: from core.byshenk.net (core.byshenk.net [62.58.73.230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E2B213C4A8 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:25:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from byshenknet@byshenk.net) Received: from core.byshenk.net (localhost.aoes.com [127.0.0.1]) by core.byshenk.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l9O9OhI5074323 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:24:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from byshenknet@core.byshenk.net) Received: (from byshenknet@localhost) by core.byshenk.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l9O9Oh8Z074321 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:24:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from byshenknet) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:24:43 +0200 From: Greg Byshenk To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20071024092443.GK91307@core.byshenk.net> References: <471E3620.306@mail.ru> <471E62CB.3020902@intersonic.se> <20071024081916.GJ91307@core.byshenk.net> <471F09BA.7090406@mail.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <471F09BA.7090406@mail.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.2.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on core.byshenk.net Subject: Re: 7.0-BETA1 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: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:25:07 -0000 On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 02:00:42PM +0500, rihad wrote: > >>rihad wrote: > >>>How risky is it to start using 7.0-BETA1 in production, with the > >>>intention of upgrading to release as soon as possible? Thanks. > My question was more a theoretical one: it's called BETA for some > reason, otherwise it'd still be in HEAD. To me BETA means that no major > architectural changes are expected in it any more, no? Yes, but it doesn't mean that there can't be undiscovered bugs that could cause problems. > Our machine-to-be is quite mission-critical... But if I start with the > latest 6.x release, it would be more difficult to migrate to 7.0 when it > comes out than if I start with 7.0-BETA?. I've known people running > 4-STABLE or 5-STABLE branches on mission-critical machines, without even > bothering to upgrade, but I think they're stress-testing their luck ;-) > So I don't want to join their camp, that's why I asked for advice ;-) > Again it's named BETA for a reason, so it could be less intrusive than > STABLE?.. > I will definitely start with beta if it reaches BETA2 in a week or two - > the time I got ;-) Thanks for advice. Well, if it is a "machine-to-be", then I suspect that you should be safe in starting with 7.0-BETA. First, there don't appear to be any serious problems with it, and second, if it is a new build "machine-to-be", then you will have the opportunity to do the testing required to ensure that there are no problems (in your situation) prior to rollout. -- greg byshenk - gbyshenk@byshenk.net - Leiden, NL