Date: 12 Jan 1999 15:15:29 +0100 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> To: Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Drew Derbyshire <software@kew.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: State of the union, 1999. Message-ID: <xzpbtk4d1by.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: Kris Kennaway's message of "Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:36:46 %2B1030 (CST)" References: <Pine.OSF.4.05.9901120928470.19976-100000@bragg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au> writes: > FWIW, I agree with the somewhat low-key release of 3.0 - as it turns > out there probably weren't any show-stopping problems, but it could > have turned into a real PR disaster for us 3.0 had at least two show-stopper bugs which would have made it worse than useless in a development environment, namely the dying daemons bug and the inetd signal bug. Add to that the fact that the Elf transition was not complete yet and that largish parts of the system were too new to trust (remember, 3.0 was released a very short time after E-day, C-day and P-day) and that we still had lots of code in that were due for a bobitt (re. the danish raiding expedition). All in all, 3.0 was not ready for deployment in a production environment, and to advertise it would have been to shoot ourselves in the foot. ISTR that Jordan had to obfuscate 3.0 on ftp.cdrom.com because too many people were installing it when they didn't have the competence to run 3.0... then we started getting complaints that it was too hard to find... I guess you can't make everybody happy :) DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpbtk4d1by.fsf>