26 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-stableRe: Further question Re: cvsupped to ...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Brian D. Woodruff | Apr 4, 2001 7:32 pm | |
| Chris Faulhaber | Apr 4, 2001 7:35 pm | |
| pirat | Apr 4, 2001 9:04 pm | |
| Brian D. Woodruff | Apr 4, 2001 9:49 pm | |
| Steve O'Hara-Smith | Apr 4, 2001 11:05 pm | |
| Bruce A. Mah | Apr 4, 2001 11:20 pm | |
| Ken Bolingbroke | Apr 4, 2001 11:38 pm | |
| Daniel O'Connor | Apr 4, 2001 11:45 pm | |
| Robert | Apr 5, 2001 12:46 am | |
| Deven Kampenhout | Apr 5, 2001 12:56 am | |
| Ben Smithurst | Apr 5, 2001 5:40 am | |
| Bob Johnson | Apr 5, 2001 6:40 am | |
| Steve Tremblett | Apr 5, 2001 6:47 am | |
| Stijn Hoop | Apr 5, 2001 6:56 am | |
| David Taylor | Apr 5, 2001 7:02 am | |
| Mike Harding | Apr 5, 2001 7:45 am | |
| Kris Kennaway | Apr 5, 2001 8:22 am | |
| Ken Bolingbroke | Apr 5, 2001 10:59 am | |
| Steve Tremblett | Apr 5, 2001 11:27 am | |
| Chris Faulhaber | Apr 5, 2001 11:32 am | |
| Nate Dannenberg | Apr 5, 2001 11:13 pm | |
| Kal Torak | Apr 5, 2001 11:37 pm | |
| Erik Trulsson | Apr 6, 2001 12:19 am | |
| Pete French | Apr 6, 2001 3:17 am | |
| Chad R. Larson | Apr 6, 2001 8:13 pm | |
| David O'Brien | Apr 7, 2001 10:59 pm |
| Subject: | Re: Further question Re: cvsupped to RELENG_4 but got 4.3-RC | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | David Taylor (dav...@yadt.co.uk) | |
| Date: | Apr 5, 2001 7:02:54 am | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-stable | |
On Thu, 05 Apr 2001, Steve Tremblett wrote:
+--- Ben Smithurst wrote: | | Did you read the first sentence of that FAQ entry? "Short answer: it's | just a name." | | If you cvsup the RELENG_4 branch, you're getting FreeBSD-stable, whether | it be called -STABLE, -RC, -BETA, -FISHCAKE, -UNSTABLE-AS-HELL, or | even -CURRENT if someone felt like playing an April Fool's day joke in | /sys/conf/newvers.sh. :-) |
I was under the impression that 4-STABLE was primarily for bugfixes applied to the 4.2-RELEASE codebase, and 4-CURRENT is for development of new features. Given that rationale, 4.3-RC should be a preliminary merge of CURRENT code into STABLE. The intruduction of (relatively) unproven code into an established as-stable-as-possible codebase introduces instability until after it has been tested, therefore just because 4.3-RC == 4-STABLE, that does not imply that 4.3-RC == stable.
You were under the wrong impression then.
4.0-CURRENT was around, and developed into something stable and working, and went through a 4.0-BETA.. 4.0-RC code-freeze, before becoming 4.0-RELEASE.
At that point, 4.0-STABLE was forked off, and the main branch was renamed 5.0-CURRENT, which started development of 5.0, which is still going on today..
Meanwhile, 4.0-STABLE had bugfixes and features MFCed (Merge from current) to it, and became 4.1-BETA, 4.1-RC, 4.1-RELEASE, through the appropriate code freeze stuff...
Then it became 4.1-STABLE, and so on, until now, when it's 4.2-STABLE, then was renamed 4.3-BETA, 4.3-RC, and will shortly be tagged as 4.3-RELEASE....
People aren't concerned with the NAME, they are concerned about
That's all it is. a name. if you cvsup to RELENG_4, you're getting the latest code from the 4.x-STABLE branch, be it a -STABLE, -BETA, -RC, or even a tagged -RELEASE.
updating production machines to what is supposedly the latest bugfixed version, and getting a beta version instead. While the code in the new
BETA > STABLE in terms of stability and quality (theoretically, anyway)
features may be of the highest quality and could possibly be bug free, if I'm running a frontline webserver I don't want to be the guy who discovers a bug in this new code. Then again, once I have a working config on that webserver, I shouldn't be updating all that often and only for specific fixes, but that is another can of worms.
I'd prefer to stay with 4-STABLE from the date of the codefreeze as opposed to 4.3-RC. I'll be waiting until 4.3-RELEASE before updating.
And here you contradict yourself.
"the date of the code freeze" -- after that point the code is frozen, so new features _can't_ be added. Only bug fixes are added.
It's entirely your choice when you want to upgrade, but 4.3-BETA is closer to -RELEASE stability than -STABLE from a few weeks before it...
-- David Taylor dav...@yadt.co.uk