On 4/6/06, [LoN]Kamikaze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Alexey Karagodov wrote: > > hi. > > i think, this unstablity happaning just because developers trying to make > > two systems at one time, one is 6.0 and another 7.0 current and they > > supporting old version, lower then 6.0 > > i want to ask developers, why you developing new system, 7.0, if you don't > > finish old, 6.0 ?! > > finish 6.0, make it work, and upgrade it to 7.0 and to 8.0 and to 9.0 and so > > on ... > > what so new and revolutionary in 7.0 in comparison with 6.0 ?! > > to use your system i must be a DEVELOPER, but i don't have so much time! i > > don't want to develope! i want to use, i want to help you with some advise ( > > e.g. what feature to add, what feature to change etc), i can and i want to > > share some of my hardware to feet your needs, make a mirror, make a test > > server/workstation/notebook/PDA etc. i'm not an freebsd developer. i'm just > > admin and a user. > > your system is most greatest i ever seen. another wonderful system is > > SOLARIS. > > but your's is so unstable ... > > All this is described in many places. It all comes down to this: if you > don't want to be a developer, JUST USE THE RELEASE BRANCH. That means > Releng_6_0 for now. > > Stable only means compatible to previous versions of the same branch. > Not that the system is stable.
Maybe they/we should change the name of -STABLE to -APISTABLE or -ABISTABLE. I've always had to go out of my way to explain what -STABLE is to newbies that assumed it was stable.... changing this name should keep them off the developer branches. oh and we should change -CURRENT to -THISWILLBREAKYOURSYSTEM for all those Gentoo Linux type people. :-) 1 bad experience is equal to 10 good ones. -- BSD Podcasts @ http://bsdtalk.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"