On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Pavel Timofeev <timp87_at_gmail.com> wrote: > That's what most people think. > I think we hurry. Imo, BETA/RC period for !NEW! STABLE branch should be > longer. Six months, for example. > New STABLE branch is very important! IMHO different OS releases (Unix or not) are usually at the state of FreeBSD current regarding stability. FreeBSD late BETA and early RC are usually very stable. Therefore the approximate one month period between the first beta and the release is adequate time. Many users are reluctant to follow stable because they have to go through the wolrd && kernel procedure. Since freebsd-update exists as a means of binary upgrading a system through releases, I don't think that it would be a bad idea to be able to use is for stable as well. Let's assume that we would have monthly minor releases something like 9.0.1, 9.0.2 etc. That could ease the fear of .0 release. This is coming from someone who is using current all the time for workstations and stable for production servers and never uses freebsd-update! Best Regards -- George Kontostanos aisecure.netReceived on Fri Oct 14 2011 - 21:03:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:19 UTC