On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Oliver Fromme wrote:
People often talk about either "-current" and "-stable",
so was curious what RELENG_7 would be called right now.
Obviously it's not called "-current", but (according to
you and Simon) it's not called "-stable" either.
I have been making an effort in the recent past to refer to the branches
by their branch names (RELENG_*) to avoid confusion. I am also of the mind
that we should have mailing lists named after the branches as well, rather
than going through the awkward transitions that you describe in this post.
(Which is a long-winded way to say that I think your confusion is
justified and understandable.)
I think this is going to be more prevalent in the time-based release world
since we will soon have 3 different RELENG branches that could reasonably
be called "-stable".
Actually the often used terms "-current" and "-stable"
are ambiguous and not really accurate. E.g. someone
talks about "the -stable branch" and you have no idea
which one of the several RELENG_* ones he means. It's
probably better to always use the CVS names or the
branch name (from sys/conf/newvers.sh).
Voila! GMTA :)
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
