Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 02 May 2002 20:44:02 -0700
From:      Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>, Drew Tomlinson <drew@mykitchentable.net>, bmah@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Difference between RELENG_* and RELENG_*_BP 
Message-ID:  <200205030344.g433i7b88531@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks all for the responses. Between the web pages and this
discussion, my knowledge of this has now become a *lot* clearer.

Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes:
> -STABLE is called -STABLE these days, but RELENG_X -STABLE is
> really RELENG_X_Y + changes pending RELENG_X_(Y+1).  Way back
> when, I think we had a long knock-down drag-out fight about
> naming of -STABLE vs. -DEVEL, and the expectations users have
> about the resulting code.  That was where -SECURITY showed up:
> -SECURITY is a "stable version of -STABLE" (as if things weren't
> exciting enough... 8-) 8-)).

Gah! Too much excitement for me. ;)

I'm sure you folks hashed this all over before, but really...calling a
branch "-stable" when it really isn't is not good semantic practice
IMNSHO.
------
Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org 
>>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<<

"All the wonders you seek are within yourself."            
                              -Sir Thomas Brown




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?200205030344.g433i7b88531>