Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1998 13:59:12 -0500 From: "Stephen A. Derdau" <sderdau@ne.mediaone.net> To: Ken McGlothlen <mcglk@serv.net> Cc: VEGA <vega@d132-h017.rh.rit.edu>, Steve Friedrich <SteveFriedrich@Hot-Shot.com>, FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Plea to core team Message-ID: <36473B80.6E98008B@ne.mediaone.net> References: <199811091737.MAA31468@laker.net> <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811091307020.15459-100000@d132-h017.rh.rit.edu> <199811091831.KAA06518@ralf.serv.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I agree that you need to release something sooner or later and it can't be in beta test forever. I also think it's the responsibility of the person downloading or installing something to make sure it's what they want. With proper percautions that is. I appreciate knowing that I too can try my hand at the newest and greatest should I choose to do so. I know let's ask Mr. Stallman what he would suggest ! http://www.fsf.org I really have to say it's great that there is a FreeBSD and a Linux and GNU. People get to learn this stuff and arn't left in the dark on important technology. I'm starting to understand there is alot more to simple things than what first meets the eye. I may not understand it but I'm learning :-) Thank You !!! Ken McGlothlen wrote: > > vega@d132-h017.rh.rit.edu (VEGA) writes: > > | On Mon, 9 Nov 1998, Steve Friedrich wrote: > | > | > I wonder if anyone subscribed to -questions besides me thinks that the 3.0R > | > shouldn't have been made generally available. It is allowing total morons > | > to destroy FreeBSD's reputation due to their incompetence. [...] > | > | i have to agree. would i be wrong to assume that it was released only to > | appease the masses who would be outraged if it hadnt been released on october > | 15th? it seems to me that the release was just rushed, to meet a > | pseudo-deadline. it's usable, provided you have experience with problems that > | may occur, but newbies should definitly NOT be using 3.0. > > I'd say most experienced system administrators know that no matter how much > bugtesting a major revision to the operating system undergoes, some things only > come out after it gets released. I, for one, would never use a fresh x.0.0 > release on a production system, because I know issues will get discovered over > those first few months. It's the same reason I didn't upgrade to NT 4.0 on my > NT-box-what-just-sits-there-most-of-the-time until SP2 came out. (Not that > that made it any better; I should have waited until SP3.) > > 3.0 was ready to move to the -RELEASE cycle---you can't betatest forever. And > it's turning up some issues that will get fixed in 3.0.1 on and so forth. For > myself, I'll probably wait until 3.1.1 before I really upgrade my system. > > I think perhaps simply making it clearer what -RELEASE and -STABLE mean on the > home page would help a lot, along with having links to each installation. But > I don't think that restricting 3.0 is the answer. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message -- When you find out the answer it's always something you thought you knew :-) Answers here http://www.freeBSD.org/search Happily Running! FreeBSD 2.2.7-STABLE #0: Fri Oct 9 19:54:29 EDT 1998 sderdau@SDERDAU.ne.mediaone.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36473B80.6E98008B>