Re: next release

2004-02-13 Thread Robert Watson
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Sergey Matveychuk wrote: > Where do you plan to release of 4.10 or 4.9.1? There is not info on > http://www.freebsd.org/releng/index.html There are plans for at least one, and likely two, more releases on the RELENG_4 branch. And there could well be more if there is signif

Re: next release

2004-02-13 Thread Dmitry Pryanishnikov
Hello! On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:15:51 -0800, Dave Tweten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >>Now you see why I recommend that people wait for a month after a release >>to update and to do it to STABLE, not release. > > I agree wholeheartedly. I'm surprised your truth was accepte

Re: next release

2004-02-12 Thread Dave Tweten
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >Now you see why I recommend that people wait for a month after a release >to update and to do it to STABLE, not release. I agree wholeheartedly. I'm surprised your truth was accepted as calmly as it was. When I offered the same suggestion a few years ago I was thoroug

Re: next release

2004-02-12 Thread Kevin Oberman
> From: Felipe Neuwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:35:07 -0200 > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hello Folks, > > I always have the doubt... And when the stables goes to 5.3, how I'll > update my 4.9-STABLE servers to the 5.3-STABLE? If I download the source > from cvs and compi

Re: Next release

2001-01-10 Thread Jordan Hubbard
> Good to know. Sorry for the slightly off topic reply to -stable now. > I was going by the fact that the date for 4.2 was not mentioned on the > website (even though I had seen it mentioned in the mailing lists), nor But it IS listed on the web site and has for some time now. Please see http:

Re: Next release

2001-01-10 Thread Tim McMillen
On Wednesday January 10, 2001 23:22, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > Actually it says right now on http://www.freebsd.org/releases/ > > that 4.3 will be available in late March. It seems unusual that > > such a precise time would be placed on the release already. I > > think the date > > Not really.

Re: Next release

2001-01-10 Thread opentrax
I'll go even further. Yesterday Apple (http://www.apple.com) anounce the formal release date of March 24, 2001 for OS X. Jessem. On 10 Jan, Jordan Hubbard wrote: >> >> Actually it says right now on http://www.freebsd.org/releases/ >> that 4.3 will be available i

Re: Next release should be called 5.0 (was:4.4 BSD forever?)

2000-01-12 Thread David O'Brien
On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 08:48:08AM -0800, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote: > > UCB and AT&T had agreed that there were to be no new releases of BSD > and that 4BSD was the final release. 4.1BSD - 4.4BSD were named such > because they were "officially" only modifications to 4BSD and

RE: Next release should be called 5.0 (was:4.4 BSD forever?)

2000-01-10 Thread Allen Pulsifer
> Actually, no. The distribution is called 4.4BSD, not BSD 4.4. The same > goes for 4.1 or 4.2 which were known as 4.1BSD and 4.2BSD respectively. > Anyone who understands what BSD is, will know the difference. You're right. My bad. 4.4BSD. See how easy it is to get it confused? Allen

RE: Next release should be called 5.0 (was:4.4 BSD forever?)

2000-01-10 Thread Tom
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Allen Pulsifer wrote: > I have to agree with this poster. The next release should be > called FreeBSD 5.0. > > "BSD 4.4" is a desciptive term still used to describe a whole > family of OS's. People outside the FreeBSD circle are going to be

Re: Next release should be called 5.0 (was:4.4 BSD forever?)

2000-01-10 Thread Josef Karthauser
D 4.4 and FreeBSD 4.4. This can easily be avoided, > > at no cost, by calling the next release FreeBSD 5.0. > > > I agree too. I don't... FreeBSD is FreeBSD, and BSD is BSD - IMHO it doesn't matter that the people who don't know the difference get confused, if they&