Re: HEADS UP: Name change committed

[Richard Coleman <Richard.Coleman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon wrote:
>     I'd personally rather not have branches.  I think we can do it by
>     simply using tags.  The key will be to fix the OS interfaces such that
>     they are both forwards and backwards compatible beyond the first release.
>
> 					-Matt
> 					Matthew Dillon 
> 					<dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I know it's a pain in the butt to MFC code, but I really hope you will 
reconsider this.

I track FreeBSD-stable on a few infrastructure machines, and have found 
it a godsend.  The problem with using a release branch is that it is so 
"static".  Eventually, the machine gets far enough behind the curve that 
you have to reinstall.  And of course, tracking -current is too 
"dynamic" for such machines.  The stable branch has always seemed like a 
good compromise that works well in practice (as long as you read the 
mailing list).  I like the slow "morphing" of the system from one 
version to another.

I'm open to other possibilities.  But as a sysadmin, my main desire is 
"controlled change".  And so far, the -stable branch has achieved this 
better than other methods I've tried.

Richard Coleman
Richard.Coleman@xxxxxxxxxx