Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 23:34:25 -0400 From: The Babbler <bts@babbleon.org> To: Yann Sommer <yann@yann.de> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why not stick with [STABLE] [Was: RE: Releases] Message-ID: <3AD27F41.42FCB6BC@babbleon.org> References: <BPEHKNFLJKCIDDNDIOAKKEOCCCAA.yann@yann.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yann Sommer wrote: > > Heya all, > > I've been following this thread with some extra attention, since I remember > beeing new to FreeBSD and complaining about a dedicated Server I ordered, > running BETA. It is just, as has been mentioned a few times before on this > list, against what other programms use for version naming. > But, in my humble opinion I think the easiest solution has not been > mentioned here before. Why not just suffix the old version description to > stable, like: > > 4.3-STABLE-BETA > 4.3-STABLE-RC > 4.3-STABLE-FINAL > > or something in that direction. The essential word "STABLE" which gives the > newer users the trust in a system (allthough it's kind of stupid after > knowing the exact naming, but heh, nobody gets born with all knowledge ;), > and at the same time sticks with the naming BSD users are used to. > Something in that direction might be good, but the proposal in & of itself wouldn't work if BSD sticks with the current scheme whereby the number isn't incremented 'til the first Beta, becuase the entire sequence would then be: 4.3-STABLE-BETA 4.3-STABLE-RC 4.3-STABLE-FINAL 4.3-STABLE (huh??? Now we get questions later) 4.4-STABLE-BETA but maybe: 4.3-STABLE-ENCHANCED or 4.3-STABLE-POSTFINAL or something; or or 4.3-STABLE-BETA 4.3-STABLE-RC 4.3-STABLE-FINAL 4.4-STABLE-DEVEL (bump up the # at the beginning of "ordinary time" rather than the end) 4.4-STABLE-BETA To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3AD27F41.42FCB6BC>