Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 17 Mar 1997 20:11:57 -0600
From:      Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Cc:        stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: -current and -stable mailing lists
Message-ID:  <l03010d01af539a33b8dd@[208.2.87.4]>
In-Reply-To: <199703180059.RAA09340@rover.village.org>
References:  Your message of "Mon, 17 Mar 1997 18:51:01 CST."	 <l03010d00af53952588d5@[208.2.87.4]> <l03010d00af53952588d5@[208.2.87.4]> Your message of "Mon, 17 Mar 1997 12:45:05 PST." <199703172045.MAA01873@ns.frihet.com> <199703172045.MAA01873@ns.frihet.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>In message <l03010d00af53952588d5@[208.2.87.4]> Richard Wackerbarth writes:
>: It bothers me that people are so quick to "write off" a system as soon as it
>: is kicked out the door.  I think that such an attitude shows that there is
>: a lack of realization as to the performance level expected of a "real"
>: product.  If the attitude continues to be this one whereby a system is
>: discarded just when it reaches the "almost complete" stage, FreeBSD will
>: continue to be viewed as a "hobbyist" system rather than the quality
>: product that many of us want it to be.
>
>If the 2.2 release process was shorter, then I might agree with you.
>However, the release has been extensively tested and tuned over the
>last several months.  It seems to be more stable than the 2.1.x system
>that I had for a while.  If anything, that shows a high level of
>commitment to quality.
>
>Personally, I like the idea of having -frozen to describe the 2.1.x
>tree and bring 2.2.x into the -stable role with 3.0 still being called
>-current.

1) Give me a break. 2.1 is NOT "frozen", small updates continue, as they
should,
to dribble in. I don't think anyone expects anything major to happen.
However, let me remind you that the 2.1.7 situation would not have been
as much of an issue if we had not been fighting the "frozen" attitude ever
since 2.1.5 was released.

2) I agree that 2.2 should not require much public testing time before
it reaches the confidence level that will relegate 2.1 to the morgue.
However, the CD isn't even in production. Many of the people who will really
hit it hard don't even have a copy yet.





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?l03010d01af539a33b8dd>