Kal Torak <kalt...@quake.com.au> types:

Wrong. The problem is that the common perception of the meaning of "BETA" causes people to want to know how not to get a BETA when it shows up. Those of us who try to contribute via -questions have to put up with it there as well as here. If there's a simple solution to making the problem go away, I'd certainly like to have it happen.

Matthew Emmerton <ma...@gsicomp.on.ca> types:

No, because it happens to everyone who uses the standard-supfile in the /usr/share/examples/cvsup. I think that stable-supfile should vanish from that directory, and standard-supfile should be right for the branch the system came from, no matter which branch that was.

You can already say "go to FAQ/admin.html#RELEASE-CANDIDATE". That doesn't stop the questions. While all of them cause problems

Note that the third-party repositories don't have a chance to be vetted by committers, who will presumably catch obsolete, inaccurate, or suboptimal information. Between these two problems, they are clearly bad for the community. If you maintain one of those things - I'd be interested in knowing why you aren't submitting them to the documentation project, instead of maintaining your own repository?

Jordan Hubbard <jk...@osd.bsdi.com> types:

I know, you're kidding. But if some group of people who have to deal with the questions propose a complete new naming scheme designed to deal with all the problems we see the current ones causing (though the only serious one is -BETA/-RC), is there any chance of it being adopted? How about just a new name for either -BETA (the major source of the problem), or simply calling -STABLE -ALPHA, thus making -BETA & -RC seem desirable?

<mike

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message