Re: Debian doesn't have to be slower than time.
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 01:03:25PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 11:31:19AM -0500, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> > Then how come we haven't considered one yet? Joel specifically
> > mentioned FreeBSD at the beginning of this thread. I use that OS daily
> > in my job, and yes, they have a *vastly* better release process than
> > ...
>
> I do not use FreeBSD, never did, so maybe you can explains something to me.
> Once I was told that their release strategy is something comparable to
> another layer put on top of testing in our pool. Or trying to phrase this in
> Debian terms, if a package is in testing for let's say 3 weeks without a
> release critical bug it goes into stable automatically and once they release
> they just take the actual stable. Is that correct? If so, what do they do
> with release critical bugs coming up in stable? Restore the last bug free
> version from backup if possible?
Just to clarify a potentially confusing point... what FreeBSD calls stable
is roughly analagous to what we call testing; their unstable is equivalent
to our unstable. Their release is our stable.
It's not a perfect mapping, but that's the closest I'm aware of.
--
***************************************************************************
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
Reply to: