Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 12:53:44 -0700 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: Alex Perel <veers@disturbed.net> Cc: paul@originative.co.uk, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -stable vs -current (was Re: solid NFS patch #6... ) Message-ID: <199905011953.MAA26792@implode.root.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 01 May 1999 14:47:00 EDT." <Pine.BSF.4.10.9905011441320.22353-100000@shattered.disturbed.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> point, we shouldn't be merging stuff back into the -stable branch, only fix >> specific straightforward problems that don't require complete >> re-engineering. > >No new features means stagnation in development. It means that someone >coming to FreeBSD and looking for a feature will only find it in -current, >which, by virtue of being -current, will have other miscellaneous problems. >This person gets annoyed and leaves. Sorry, but this just isn't how our development model has worked over the past 6 years. -stable means it and we are not going to change that. -current is for new features. The only new features that are added to -stable are those which don't affect existing functionality and architectural changes are to be avoid as much as possible. This has been a winning model for us and we're not going to change it. -DG David Greenman Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org Creator of high-performance Internet servers - http://www.terasolutions.com 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?199905011953.MAA26792>