Date: Wed, 08 Nov 1995 09:44:47 -0800 From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM> To: "Karl Denninger, MCSNet" <karl@mcs.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Impact of upcoming 2.1 release on the STABLE branch? Message-ID: <199511081745.JAA00212@corbin.Root.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 08 Nov 95 11:09:56 CST." <m0tDE0a-000IDUC@venus.mcs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> >Anyone know what it is? What will STABLE be after this release goes? >> >> For awhile (months), it will continue to be the 2.1 sources. We are >> planning a 2.1.5 (perhaps 2.1.1 - we haven't decided yet what to call it) >> release sometime during the first quarter of '96. >> >> -DG > >Wait a second... > >I thought that STABLE was something *less than* 2.1? So once 2.1 "ships", >then STABLE will be 2.1 as-is, plus perhaps patches? That's correct. We're just planning to release this next year as a stop-gap for the long delays we're expecting in the 2.2 release cycle. It should be almost entirely a bugfix release. >I'm trying to figure out which copy to SUP here and maintain locally. I >haven't used CURRENT, as that is by definition at times not even compilable. > >For a production system, STABLE has been ok for us -- is this the continuing >recommendation? Yes. -DG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511081745.JAA00212>