Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 09:38:10 -0400 From: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The Old Way Was Better Message-ID: <3F5B34C2.7070207@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <3F5AF539.30300.EE6367F@localhost> References: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0309070044200.75233-100000@s1.stradamotorsports.com> <3F5AF539.30300.EE6367F@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dan Langille wrote: > On 7 Sep 2003 at 13:24, Paul Robinson wrote: > >>Jason C. Wells wrote: >> >>>I would like to cast my vote for returning to the old release method. >>>Please don't call the next major version of FreeBSD a release until it is >>>truly ready to be a release. >> >>For what it's worth, I and a large number of other people I know would >>agree. The 5.x releases so far have been VERY badly received with the >>people I've spoken to and it's not done FBSD any favours. > > The instructions and precautions for early adoptors are clearly > defined. 5.* is not ready for production. That is widely known. > 5.* is still -current, not -stable. > > Those running -current need to be aware of the issues. This is immaterial. What we're talking about here is marketing. Marketing has nothing to do with reality. If it did, Microsoft's commercials wouldn't show people flying around, they'd show them forking out extra money for anti-virus software. Fact is, I agree with both sides of the argument. The easy access to 5.x-RELEASE has caused me to start using it in a test scenerio when I would not have if a -RELEASE had not been rolled, therefore, it's useful. On the flip side, I have a client who I'm putting a server together for, who wanted 5 on it, and FreeBSDSystems is foolishly shipping 5 installed by default on their new servers. Obviously, this _could_ become a bikeshed, but I have something I feel is the obvious answer: Next time, let's call it 6.0-BETA. This serves both purposes. A CD can be cut from the snapshot to increase the number of people testing, yet (even to PHBs) the term BETA means something that will cause them to fall back to (then) 5.X. Honestly, I can't imagine any reason why this would not be an improvement. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F5B34C2.7070207>