Re: No version tags on Preview?

[Dave Hayes <dave@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>     Preview's main purpose is to support those users who want a fairly 
>     recent HEAD, but do not want to deal with, for example, the EHCI work
>     that caused my test box to stop booting for a few days :-).

So I can quote you in the documentation on this? ;) I realize that this
implies policy, so you dont have to answer immediately. If I do change
the documentation like I have offered, I'd like to put something there
that accurately reflects the project leader's intention. 

>     This theoretically frees us up to commit things to HEAD slightly less
>     carefully, but the reality is that we are no less careful then, say,
>     the FreeBSD folks are when they commit something to their HEAD.  So
>     anyone who felt comfortable staying up with HEAD in FreeBSDland
>     should feel the same comfort level staying up with HEAD in 
>     DragonFlyland.

Welp, twice before I've bee married to "ultra-stable" operating
systems. Once was SunOS 4.1.X and the other was FreeBSD 4.X
(coincidental version numbers?). This is fine until you get to a point
where your distribution doesn't run on new hardware, a point where you
can't run what you know works and have to move to new software just
because the hardware has obsoleted you. (Next stop, the twilight zone.)

So...I'm trying something different here (out of necessity). I'm going
to run the most stable bleeding edge code I can, regardless of how
oxymoronic that is, and see how that works. I'm thinking the aggregate
time spent upgrading every month is less than the large chunks of
frustration time I have on the borders of rock solidity. 

Your Preview release provides me that opportunity. Thank you. :) 
------
Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@xxxxxxxxxxx 
>>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<<

"It is a dragon, destroyer of all," cried the ants. 

Then a cat caught the lizard.