Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 16:54:59 +0300 (EET DST) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: "Andrew V. Stesin" <stesin@elvisti.kiev.ua> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The -stable problem: my view Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960610164557.9667A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <199606100845.LAA17470@office.elvisti.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
CC list trimmed a bit... On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Andrew V. Stesin wrote: > Hi, > > # 2) Couldn't maintaining of stable look like: > # a) The core team suggest that it would be nice if somebody would > # bring feature x over to -stable. > > if the feature mentioned is "new" -- than -stable can't be > officially called "stable" any more. If it isn't -- why waste > time of those great guys who are making FreeBSD? Donate your > own time to do testing if you want to get more > features, isn't it Ok? The whole idea of this statement was quite simple I think - that the core-team wouldn't waste their time on -stable, but would just suggest that a given feature (I don't mean this kernel or userland patch or other) should be brought over to -stable. After which the person (or persons) would do it in their own time. The things wouldn't be new (but already somewhat tested out in -current) and certainly nothing would be commited before it has been tested out. Sander > > -- > > With best regards -- Andrew Stesin. > > +380 (44) 2760188 +380 (44) 2713457 +380 (44) 2713560 > > "You may delegate authority, but not responsibility." > Frank's Management Rule #1. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960610164557.9667A-100000>