Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 17:29:16 +0200 From: Holger Kipp <hk@alogis.com> To: Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> Cc: "\[LoN\]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de>, Alexey Karagodov <karagodov@gmail.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Disappointed Message-ID: <20060406152916.GA38161@intserv.int1.b.intern> In-Reply-To: <ef10de9a0604060727t3dd691f4haebac67fa834553f@mail.gmail.com> References: <20060405200341.GD14126@math.jussieu.fr> <20060405200727.GA28371@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060405201500.GE14126@math.jussieu.fr> <20060405211154.GA30089@soaustin.net> <c7aff4ef0604060458u1a019e0dna740f61e53299c25@mail.gmail.com> <44350FDF.1060206@gmx.de> <ef10de9a0604060727t3dd691f4haebac67fa834553f@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 09:27:10AM -0500, Nikolas Britton wrote: > On 4/6/06, [LoN]Kamikaze <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > > > Alexey Karagodov wrote: > > > your system is most greatest i ever seen. another wonderful system is > > > SOLARIS. > > > but your's is so unstable ... > > > > All this is described in many places. It all comes down to this: if you > > don't want to be a developer, JUST USE THE RELEASE BRANCH. That means > > Releng_6_0 for now. > > > > Maybe they/we should change the name of -STABLE to -APISTABLE or > -ABISTABLE. I've always had to go out of my way to explain what > -STABLE is to newbies that assumed it was stable.... changing this > name should keep them off the developer branches. oh and we should > change -CURRENT to -THISWILLBREAKYOURSYSTEM for all those Gentoo Linux > type people. :-) > > 1 bad experience is equal to 10 good ones. Please, not again. This topic comes up a few times every year. If someone is capable of cvsupping to X-STABLE or X-CURRENT, compiling world and kernel, running mergemaster etc., he should have read the handbook, too. This is similar to the neverending discussion about -STABLE, -BETA, -RC, -PRERELEASE-Tags. Actually it doesn't matter what names are in use, there is always someone who is expecting something different and complains or is unwilling to read the documentation first. So please just stick with the names we have now. It might be a good idea(*) to extend the standard-supfile and add something like # ATTENTION # To understand the different naming schemes for development # branches, you should at least read # http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/current-stable.html # # You should only track DEVELOPMENT(!) branches like # -STABLE or -CURRENT if you _understand_ the implications # and can live with them! either right at the top or next to the tag-Definition Regards, Holger Kipp (*) which most people will ignore -- they also ignore the relevant handbook-entries and they would also ignore different tag-names like -SHOOTYOURSELFINTHEFOOT or -REALLYVERYUNSTABLE, -READTHEHANDBOOKBEFORETRACKINGTHIS <sigh>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060406152916.GA38161>