Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:55:06 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: audit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ABIs and 5.x branch: freeze kernel module ABI at 5.0 or 5.1? Message-ID: <20021127085506.GC43828@starjuice.net> In-Reply-To: <2079.1038351585@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1021126174032.88614J-100000@fledge.watson.org> <2079.1038351585@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On (2002/11/26 23:59), Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > It's very simple in my mind: we only freeze ABI's on -stable branches > (and we actually even violated that for 4-stable I belive). > > Whenever we branch a new -stable from -current, that's when we freeze > the ABI's for that branch. I agree, but I think that this attitude warrants a different name for pre-branch releases. Things have changed to the point where a large number of users don't understand the implications of point-naught releases. I'd go so far as to say that 5.0-RELEASE should be renamed to 5.0-PREVIEW and that 5.1-RELEASE should be renamed to 5.0-RELEASE. I really didn't want to send this message because I know people will fixate on the name to use, instead of the issue that pre-branch releases should be named differently from post-branch releases. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021127085506.GC43828>