In a message dated 11/9/04 5:24:53 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I'm not saying that's how it works, but when this thread started, that's how
> it was depicted.
>It most certainly wasn't. SInce it was me who said that releases are 'points
>in time', which is what you have
On 2004-11-09 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [...]the difference between having a meaningful, documented release
> structure rather than just slapping out a snapshot because its "time".
> At some point you have to stop working on stuff, hammer out a release, and
> then start working again. It sh
In a message dated 11/8/04 4:46:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>By the way, Iâve tested our competitions printers. HPâs printers are far
better >designed than anything else Iâve worked with. The point is
programming
and >computer technologies are very young fields. Youâr
this somewhere else (was RE: difference between
releases)
Can you please shut the fuck up and mind your own business?
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[
Hello there,
For some people bandwidth is a valuable resource! Can you
please take your discussion somewhere else (e.g. freebsd-chat).
Thank you!
Manfred Riem
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questio
In a message dated 11/8/04 4:46:25 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>So we went from three losers to four bozos
Well I had to add you now, didn't I, Mrs. Butterworth? Now this is something
we can discuss. What is more insulting, being called a Loser or a Bozo?
_
In a message dated 11/8/04 5:31:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>So when will you switch to decaf? Seriously though, in case you didn't
>notice this IS an open source discussion list, FreeBSD 5 is not just
>another snapshot it has undergone qualification and is in my experi
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:29:43 -0500 (EST), Jerry McAllister
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
My only point was that a "Release" should not be "just another
snapshot", there
should be some "plan".
[snip]
It is more than just another snapshot. It is a special snapshot that
has things frozen and
>
> In a message dated 11/8/04 2:41:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >As far as open-open source being the only one in beta, I work in
> >development where our code is closed-source. Even we have to admit that
> >our releases fit better into the category of BETA than REL
On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 12:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 11/8/04 2:41:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >As far as open-open source being the only one in beta, I work in
> >development where our code is closed-source. Even we have to admit that
> >our rel
At 01:57 PM 11/8/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the 4 bozos who jump on everything I say will
just cut back on the coffee there wouldn't be so much BS.
In a previous message, you indicated that you were sure some people
found your posts valuable. The point you seem to be missing entirely
is that
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 12:58 PM
To: Butterworth, Thaddaeus (Manpower Contract)
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: difference between releases
In a message dated 11/8/04 2:41:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] write
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 12:47:30PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
> I notice the same 3 losers answering over and over.
They're probably among the last people who haven't put you on their
kill-list yet. Congratulations, you're on mine now. Goodbye.
__
In a message dated 11/8/04 2:41:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>As far as open-open source being the only one in beta, I work in
>development where our code is closed-source. Even we have to admit that
>our releases fit better into the category of BETA than RELEASE.
Which i
Message: 18
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 12:47:30 EST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: difference between releases
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 11/8/04 11:54:37 AM Eastern Standard
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 8, 2004, at 12:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/8/04 11:54:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
on the "release", which should be a known, completed code base.
All part of the experience I suppose.
The whole world is in beta.
On Nov 8, 2004, at 12:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/8/04 11:54:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
on the "release", which should be a known, completed code base.
All part of the experience I suppose.
The whole world is in beta. Get over it.
Only the o
In a message dated 11/8/04 11:54:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> on the "release", which should be a known, completed code base.
>
> All part of the experience I suppose.
>The whole world is in beta. Get over it.
Only the open-source world.
I notice the same 3 loser
>
> In a message dated 11/8/04 10:49:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> How discouraging for you not to understand that.
> >
> > Its "discouraging", because a "Release" should be " a completed set of
> > features that have been tested and thought to be bug-free"
>
> >Y
In a message dated 11/8/04 10:49:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> How discouraging for you not to understand that.
>
> Its "discouraging", because a "Release" should be " a completed set of
> features that have been tested and thought to be bug-free"
>You know that this i
On 2004-11-08 10:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In a message dated 11/8/04 10:12:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>In a message dated 11/8/04 5:46:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>> Releases are fixed points in time. They are marked on their respect
In a message dated 11/8/04 10:12:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> In a message dated 11/8/04 5:46:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >Releases are fixed points in time. They are marked on their respective
> branch
> >of development and that's i
>
> In a message dated 11/8/04 5:46:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >Releases are fixed points in time. They are marked on their respective
> branch
> >of development and that's it. A x.y-RELEASE version is effectively a
> symbolic
> >name for a specific moment in t
On 2004-11-08 07:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 11/8/04 5:46:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >Releases are fixed points in time. They are marked on their
> >respective branch of development and that's it. A x.y-RELEASE
> >version is effectively a symb
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 2:56 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: difference between releases
>
>
> In a message dated 11/8/04 5:46:59 AM Easte
In a message dated 11/8/04 5:46:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Releases are fixed points in time. They are marked on their respective
branch
>of development and that's it. A x.y-RELEASE version is effectively a
symbolic
>name for a specific moment in time.
Wow, thats w
On 2004-11-08 11:06, Mipam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At this moment RELENG_5_3 kan be followed to obtain 5.3 release.
> Also RELENG_5 kan be followed, will this be for early adopters?
> Some day i hope to run a 5.x with the ule scheduler or is ule more likely
> to come in 6.x? 5.3 releas
27 matches
Mail list logo
