Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 03:20:34 -0600 From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> To: Doug Barton <Doug@gorean.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, jkh@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: which branch? Message-ID: <00031703320100.00854@eel> In-Reply-To: <38D1C75D.AEC542C2@gorean.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10003161449360.83199-100000@ogurok.com> <20000316122126.A90676@mushhaven.net> <38D1C75D.AEC542C2@gorean.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Doug Barton wrote: > This happens every version update cycle. During the 2.2.x -> 3.0 update > many of us asked for a new "description" of the "post new branch > pseudo-release" branch. Something like -DEVEL, which conveys that it's > not -CURRENT anymore, but not quite -STABLE either. It seems that > suggestion was ignored. :) Right idea, but the wrong order. We should have 5-DEVEL and leave 4-CURRENT. Or, if there is opposition to using -current both before and after the release, how about 4-RECENT or 4-LATEST? However, I personally prefer simply "4" with no add on. The "current" could still be used for the mailing list. From previous correspondence, I thought that Jordan was going to do something along these lines. But, as usual, it never happens when it should. Then it is "too late". Speaking of mailing lists, we REALLY need an additional list. It is unfair, and confusing, to have no solidly distinct lists for the 3.x, 4.x and 5.x branches. I would propose that we create a new list for either 4 or 5 and automatically subscribe all "-current" subscribers to both lists. They can then "opt out" (unsubscribe) if they are not interested in both lists. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00031703320100.00854>