On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 02:51:50PM -0500, jchacon@genuity.net wrote:
> The release branch for 1.5 was 6 months in length...During which time
> real bugs did creep in and/or were found as side effects and had to get fixed.

> This might work for X.Y.Z releases but the mainline releases even in good cases
> take a while to cook and a new user coming in and supping -release would
> be reasonably surprised to possibly get something labeled 1.6Alpha or something
> similiar.

I was speaking about what you get when you sup with a supfile that starts with:

release release=src  (or allsrc...)

That is independent from the 'release branch' in CVS, and is an administrative
matter on the sup server.

My understanding is that such a sup would NEVER give someone 1.6ALPHA, but
would give (in timeline order...)

1.4.1ALPHA -> 1.4.1BETA -> 1.4.2ALPHA -> 1.4.2BETA -> 1.4.3ALPHA -> 1.4.3BETA
-> 1.5.1ALPHA

This release _collection_ doesn't exist until a release occurs, and then
follows the release+patches.

							David

I had said:
> >Since minor version releases are patch releases - there should never be bugs
> >introduced, because only bug fixes should be pulled up.
> >(And possibly driver additions, which should never break existing code, just
> >add new 'possibly-nonfunctional' code.)
> >
> >Any such pull-ups on 1.5 are what will become 1.5.1 someday anyway - since
> >major changes -> on -current, will become 1.6
> >
> >So, supping -release is a way to automatically get security patches and
> >bug fixes.
> >
> >(And no, I didn't understand that until Hubert explained it to me a year
> >and a bit ago ;-)

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net --> Mastery of UNIX, like
mastery of language, offers real freedom. The price of freedom is always dear,
but there's no substitute. Personally, I'd rather pay for my freedom than live
in a bitmapped, pop-up-happy dungeon like NT. - Thomas Scoville