Date: 23 Nov 1999 18:58:04 +0200 From: Vadim Belman <voland@plab.ku.dk> To: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: speaking of 3.4... Message-ID: <85903pw3fn.fsf@lflat.dp.ua> In-Reply-To: "Daniel C. Sobral"'s message of "Tue, 23 Nov 1999 18:17:02 %2B0900" References: <3378.943323218@localhost> <383A5B8E.DF84AAA7@newsguy.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Daniel!
On 23 Nov 99 at 11:17, "Daniel" (Daniel C Sobral) wrote:
Daniel> 3.x-stable doesn't have that much of a lifetime remaining. I think
Daniel> it would be better wait 4.x-stable.
Hm, I know few people who think twice before choosing FreeBSD for
their needs. They think versions change too fast. For some this is
a sign of bad stability (heh...) others just scared of necessity of
following the releases.
Surely enough, I do explain the real situation whenever
possible. But how many are still thinking wrong way? How many users
does FreeBSD lose because of revisions chapping and and changing?
(We must remember that what seems normal for us is a black box for
decent users.)
While I myself appreciate transformation of 4.0 into -stable
because of some useful features and changes I'm looking for, from
general point of view wouldn't it be better and make lifetime of
3.x longer?
Just an opinion...
--
/Voland Vadim Belman
E-mail: voland@plab.ku.dk
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?85903pw3fn.fsf>