Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 07:14:59 -0700 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: Chris Shenton <cshenton@it.hq.nasa.gov> Cc: rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, grog@lemis.com Subject: Re: 2.2-STABLE Message-ID: <199708261414.HAA11880@implode.root.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:00:51 EDT." <199708261400.OAA16902@wirehead.it.hq.nasa.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 15:45:14 -0700 >David Greenman <dg@root.com> wrote: > >dg> No, that is not what -stable is. The current head of each major >dg> branch that releases are cut from (e.g. 2.1.x, 2.2.x, and >dg> eventually 3.0.x) are refered to as "-stable" after the first >dg> release is cut. The designation -stable means "more stable than >dg> the most recent release on this branch". > >So would it be useful to create a CVSup target called "STABLE" or >"STABLE_2_2" instead of "RELENG_2_2"? In this case, the cvsup target is simply the name of the branch. When the branch is first created, a tag of the form RELENG_X_Y is assigned for the release engineers so that they can work on the release. It's not "stable" at that point, so it wouldn't make sense to call it that. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708261414.HAA11880>