Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 08:52:01 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org> Cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, delphij@FreeBSD.org, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/releases/6.0R schedule.sgml Message-ID: <434A8011.8080908@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20051010.234153.21933676.hrs@allbsd.org> References: <200510091329.j99DT5Bv001028@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051009162747.GA51517@hub.freebsd.org> <20051010.234153.21933676.hrs@allbsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hiroki Sato wrote: > Xin LI <delphij@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote > in <20051009162747.GA51517@hub.freebsd.org>: > > de> On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 01:29:05PM +0000, Hiroki Sato wrote: > de> > Log: > de> > Document the actual date when RELENG_6_0 branch is created. > de> > de> Is it time to also bump RELENG_6_0 to 6.0-RC1, and RELENG_6 to 6.0-STABLE > de> or 6.0-PRERELEASE? I think that's the traditional practice... > > Well, updating newvers.sh was done on the same day, but this date > does not mean RELENG_6 unfreezed. The unfreezing does not always > happen at the same time. > > -- > | Hiroki SATO > Just FYI..... Both RELENG_6 and RELENG_6_0 are called 6.0-RC1 at the moment. I did this via a commit and a tag slip yesterday. In the past we've sometimes renamed the RELENG_N branch to N-STABLE while there are still RCs being released for RELENG_N_N. This has often caused a lot of confusion from users, so I'm trying to make it less confusing this time around. Hopefully there won't be a whole lot of RCs and we'll be able to get to 6.0-RELEASE quickly. If it looks like things will drag out then we might consider unfreezing RELENG_6 and changing the name to 6-STABLE. Fortunately the release is looking really good, and the only signficant problem left without a solution is the USB keyboard issue. Hopefully that can get resolved in the next few days. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?434A8011.8080908>