Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 16:28:59 -0400 From: Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Legacy" Release Terminology [was: There is currently no usable release of FreeBSD.] Message-ID: <538F818B.8060408@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <538F747C.7010901@vangyzen.net> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1406040944570.2120@kozubik.com> <332D72DF-2225-40E2-B246-0786181AAB51@tony.li> <538F5FB5.9060008@FreeBSD.org> <662C363E-A16E-48B2-9FBF-D2D4AB81733C@dataix.net> <538F70A8.4060904@FreeBSD.org> <538F747C.7010901@vangyzen.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--38mM8MRWvQAEQxJPPfk8dvSf8OD6IbR72
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 2014-06-04 15:33, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 14:16, Jonathan Anderson wrote:
>> Jason Hellenthal wrote:
>>> Legacy . . .
>>> /adjective/
>>> COMPUTING
>>> **
>>>
>>> 1.
>>> *1*.
>>> denoting software or hardware that has been superseded but is
>>> difficult to replace because of its wide use.
>>>
>>>
>>> What about that says unsupported ?
>>
>>
>> Sure, you're right about the dictionary definition, but in some usage
>> (including among certain folks who build, package and use a popular
>> open-source alternative to FreeBSD), people treat the word "legacy" as=
>> synonymous with "obsolete". Perhaps they shouldn't, but many do, and
>> the original poster is trying to justify to the compliance-happy parts=
>> of an organisation why it's ok to base a company's future on something=
>> labelled as ${perceived-to-be-negative adjective}.
>>
>> So, rather than use words that are unclear (people in this
>> conversation seem to have different perspectives on them), I suggest
>> that we use unambiguous language: "branch X will be supported until
>> x/y/zz".
>=20
> I have long thought that "Legacy", as used on the front page of
> www.freebsd.org, was misleading. Please, let's change it. Let's call
> 8.4, 9.2, and 10.0 all "Production", because that is what they are. Th=
e
> numbers imply most of the relevant distinctions (features, maturity,
> longevity, etc.).
>=20
> Independently, specifying branch support dates would also be helpful,
> but let's at least improve the "legacy" terminology.
>=20
> Eric
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.o=
rg"
>=20
I have made a diff for the proposed change to the front page:
https://phabric.freebsd.org/D175
Comments of suggestions welcome
--=20
Allan Jude
--38mM8MRWvQAEQxJPPfk8dvSf8OD6IbR72
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=6Zhd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--38mM8MRWvQAEQxJPPfk8dvSf8OD6IbR72--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?538F818B.8060408>