Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: >> DJ Lucas wrote: >>> The real problem with it is, if we keep holding for every version >>> increment, we'll never get 6.3 out the door. >> And do we really need to get 6.3 out of the door? Essentially, without an >> errata >> page, without the team tracking security issues and bugs, it will be just a >> snapshot, not a proper distro release. Maybe versionless BLFS (i.e., "always >> use >> svn") is the way to go? > > Personally, I never use a released BLFS book. I can understand why some > feel it is necessary or important, but for me, by the time it is > released, it always feels so dated. Not a fault on any of the devs part, > just a nature of the current setup, I think.
Some users, especially new users, will prefer a 'release' version to a svn version. The advantage of BLFS 6.3 is that it is (at least should be) checked against LFS 6.3 and not svn or some hybrid version. By doing a 6.3 release, we can start working BLFS svn against LFS svn. Then when LFS releases, start over again, hopefully with a faster turn around. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
