Previously on Wed, Apr 21, 1999 at 12:31:03PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: : : I think the existing release schedule is pretty good. Any faster and : we might as well not have two branches at all. We really need a : -current branch in order to make and test radical changes, and the : companies & people who use FreeBSD need a -stable branch to keep : production boxes up to date without having to bet the farm. : : We already have the ability to shortcut certain things simply by : copying them from -current to -stable wholesale after we've determined : their stability under -current. The issue here really is safety. I : know some of you really want some of the things in -current to be : backported into -stable more quickly, but you have to be patient. We : can't compromise -stable's stability by acting too quickly. : Speaking as a heavy stable user and also a Net and OpenBSD user the big selling point I have for using FreeBSD over the other 'free' BSDs, Linux and some commercial OSs is the release structure. I believe radical alterations to this structure would be best avoided.
It is only post 3.1 release that I have become confident in the RelEng3 branch as a service platform. People desperate for current functionality can wait, back port themselves or run current. I have taken all three options in the past :-) -- GeoffB To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
