Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 11:31:29 -0500 (EST) From: Snob Art Genre <benedict@echonyc.com> To: John Kelly <jak@cetlink.net> Cc: Brian Handy <handy@sag.space.lockheed.com>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: New 3.0 SNAPshot CDROM about ready for production.. Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980219112917.17508A-100000@echonyc.com> In-Reply-To: <34eb9f96.655310@mail.cetlink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, John Kelly wrote: > Yes, but -stable is so far behind in features it's -stale. And now > that Jordan's merging all he can into -stable it may be thoroughly > broken by the time the 2.2.6 CD is cut. All new bugs with few new > features. I find this hard to believe. I don't track -stable at the moment, but I did so for some time, and I did not encounter (m)any freshly introduced bugs. What makes you think that the functionality being backported to -stable isn't useful or tested? I am under the impression that both of those are criteria for inclusion in -stable. Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.3.96.980219112917.17508A-100000>