[PC-BSD Testing] Rolling release criticism
jpm820 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 18 06:07:40 PST 2013
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 07:13 -0500, Claudio L. wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 01:15, Mike Barnard wrote:
> > Claudio,
> > The idea of STABLE reflects a picture of a pre-tested, clean, few if
> > not zero vulnerabilities. RELEASE speaks of just that, tested up to a
> > point we are comfortable releasing for users to play around with. Just
> > thinking, what if STABLE remained as thus, stable with the packages
> > updated to this branch every two months as you suggest. Any one
> > picking the stable version knows they are picking production quality
> > PCBSD. RELEASE then remains where packages are shipped in as fast as
> > you can and this runs as the semi-stable platform for near cutting
> > edge technology. This then leaves CURRENT with all the experimental
> > stuff, and bleeding edge technology.
> > Follow the FreeBSD tree. Whoever wants a stable production system goes
> > for STABLE, if you want to test new packages, run RELEASE and if you
> > want get into the bleeding edge, take CURRENT
> Either I got it backwards or you did. I think the name is a bit
> misleading, but I understood RELEASE is more stable than STABLE.
> STABLE gives you the mental picture of production quality, but in
> reality it means stable as in "pushed out as soon as it stopped
> crashing", versus CURRENT, which is "still might crash".
> The STABLE branch is a development one, while RELEASE is the production
> quality one. PCBSD being a rolling release works more like STABLE,
> getting new packages as they come (but the base system tracks RELEASE on
> freebsd, to increase confusion).
> In fact it's so confusing, we should forget about STABLE and RELEASE
> names. The idea is to have one PCBSD "EDGE" and one PCBSD "PRODUCTION"
> branches. Or something like that.
I fully agree about the renaming.
> Testing mailing list
> Testing at lists.pcbsd.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Testing