Help me

[Daniel A.]

I think it's kinda sad that there is not a standartized way of
versioning software, across the whole OSS community.

On 12/31/05, Matthew Seaman <m.seaman at infracaninophile.co.uk> wrote:
> Daniel A. wrote:
> > On 12/30/05, Pavel Duda <element at email.cz> wrote:
>
> >>In short :
> >>release - is something you want for your production system
> >>stable - is something you can use too without much worry - it should be
> >>"stable" right ? :-)
> >>current - is for brave people who like to spend nights to figure out
> >>what the hell is going on with their system and fight with all those
> >>mysterious kernel panics..
>
> > Isn't "stable" supposed to mean that it's "feature-stable", as in
> > "We've discontinued implementing new features to this kernel, and are
> > fixing bugs"?
>
> Not in FreeBSD it isn't.  You want 'Release' for that.  'Stable' is a
> development branch -- for code that has been well tested in the current
> branch and which is therefore something that could go into a release
> candidate.  It's called 'Stable' for historical reasons and because systems
> with that tag run stably -- which is a pretty damn impressive achievement
> for a code branch that can see extensive modifications to whole subsystems
> of the kernel.
>
>         Cheers,
>
>         Matthew
>
> --
> Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                       7 Priory Courtyard
>                                                       Flat 3
> PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey         Ramsgate
>                                                       Kent, CT11 9PW
>
>
>