Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 13:04:16 -0700 From: Jo Rhett <jrhett@netconsonance.com> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 Message-ID: <2892DF94-B346-4F36-9D32-165A2EA462D1@netconsonance.com> In-Reply-To: <861w3cf2pj.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <9B7FE91B-9C2E-4732-866C-930AC6022A40@netconsonance.com> <4846D849.2090005@FreeBSD.org> <80D7EE2D-A970-407B-A42C-AD17500BC463@netconsonance.com> <861w3cf2pj.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 5, 2008, at 6:09 AM, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > If you have issues with 6.3, your time would be better spent reporting > them (by which I mean describe them in detail) than waving your =20 > hands in > the air and yelling at people. Must you resort to nonsense and hyperbole? I'd said nearly a dozen times that the issues I have aren't =20 specifics. I am questioning the overall policy for EoL here. Even if =20= it was known to work properly on my hardware the overwhelming amount =20 of bugs in 6.3 indicates an unstable release. The diffs between 6.3 =20 and 6-STABLE are greater than the diffs between 6.2 and 6.3 last time =20= I checked. I can't understand the logic in having only a single supported version =20= of the OS, especially one which so many known/reported/fixed-post-=20 release bugs. And please don't respond if you can't avoid resorting to hyperbole =20 like what I quoted above. --=20 Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source =20 and other randomness
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2892DF94-B346-4F36-9D32-165A2EA462D1>