https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=291806
--- Comment #21 from Mark Millard <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Graham Perrin from comment #20) I may be making distinctions that you are not. There are concepts of the likes of: unofficial (such as personal builds) officially-built-and-distrubted-experiments: not normally built by re and is without the re@ release guarantees even though distributed via freebsd.org official-built-and-distributed-re@-supported-releases: built by re@ with the freebsd guarantees that go with it and referenced in the announcement and release notes accessed via https://www.freebsd.org/releases/ for the release. QUOTE of bapt_at_freebsd.org from what you referenced For releng: - built it in a end less loop and publish straight each time there was changes END QUOTE Well for your interpretation of that vs. mine . . . https://www.freebsd.org/releng/#team reports: QUOTE Primary RE Team ([email protected]) : Dave Cottlehuber <[email protected]>, Marc Fonvieille <[email protected]>, Jake Freeland <[email protected]>, Xin Li <[email protected]>, Ed Maste <[email protected]>, Mahdi Mokhtari <[email protected]>, Colin Percival <[email protected]>, Muhammad Moinur Rahman <[email protected]>, Lexi Winter <[email protected]> form the primary release engineering decision-making group. END QUOTE bapt@ by himself is not re@ and does not speak for re@ unless explicitly indicated --and the above that bapt referenced is not what re@ choose to do for its officially announced first release (15.0). As far as I can tell, all 14.* pkgbase build have the overall status: officially-built-and-distrubted-experiments (but not built by/for re@). The same is true for the 15.0-STABLE builds that are based on the stable/15 git branch: they have no re@ guarantee status. Using them is using experimental/developmental software. But they are officially built and distributed (by other than re@). I've been using various officially built experiments for a long time prior to 15.0. But at no time did I expect that any 14.* builds that I used, even those based on a releng/14.* git branch, had an re@ release guarantees based status, given the lack of https://www.freebsd.org/releases/ announcement and release note materials, for example. I never intended my use of "official" terminology to indicate any re@ related status unless such was also explicitly referenced. I prefer to not use personal builds for bug reporting (when I can). So I tried to report bugs shown via the officially built experiments instead, avoiding potential blame of oddities in my personal context. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
