On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Christopher Schulte wrote:
> At 03:45 AM 4/10/2001 +1200, Dan Langille wrote:
> >Give meaningful and widely used names to things which people are familiar
> >with.
>
> -CURRENT fits all those requirements.
In this case, the familiarity is reduced to those familiar with the
project. Witness the frequency with which the confusion
arises.
> > > I'm not as hot about the BETA designation, but generally feel it should
> > > be left alone simply because it's documented, and thus should NOT be a
> > > problem.
> >
> >By this designation, we could call a brake a clutch and get away with it
> >because it's all documented. The problem is not with the documentation.
> >It's with the name.
>
> Documentation is not the only factor. The name was chosen for a *reason*,
> to convey a point. It's choice was not arbitrary.
Is this from experience or are you guessing?
> And it's since been
> accepted by the development and administrative community.
The people already on the project understand. They have been
"indoctrinated" for lack of a better term. It's the new people which have
the trouble. Perhaps with a better name that trouble could be easily
avoided.
> Question being: Now, are we to a point where that accepted name needs
> to be reevaluated for the sake of general consensus, need or desire.
> That's the real question, IMHO.
I think so.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
