--Signature=_Sat__24_Mar_2007_11_38_11_-0500_Mwy1N/Ei3L=fUG0c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 16:24:08 +0100
Jan Danielsson <jan.m.danielsson@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Where's the information about releases logically and clearly
> > explained on first few pages of official NetBSD WWW? Why new user
> > is being kept blind on the subjects of developing roadmap and
> > current works on NetBSD?
>
>    http://www.netbsd.org/Releases/release-map.html ?
>
>    (As far as logic and clarity goes, I'm not sure you will be happy.
> Versioning is a subjective art, rather than an objective science).

Thanks! I'm happy! As far as the diagrams are concerned. ;-)

One excerpt of Orewellian newspeak (from the text):

"The maintenance branch(es) can be considered an __easy way__ (my emphasis) to get the most up to date fixes for a given release.

There are daily updated snapshots of the latest maintenance branches, available via both CVS, FTP and SUP. The directories pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-release-3-0/ and pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-release-2-0/ contain the extracted sources plus weekly updated tar files of both the 3.0 and 2.0 release branches respectively. These files are created in a similar manner to those in the /pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-current directory."

I decided to partitioned my HDD to have two partitions for stable and testing releases. So I dived into ftp to find out ISO files. The more I went down or read the more the mess made my hair stand up on end. "This set" here, "that set" there, ISO STABLE here, ISO BETA/UNSTABLE/5.0 (???) there, and no ISO for 4.0.

BTW. Is the ISO for 4.0_BETA or 5.0_preBETA (from http://iso.aydogan.net/)?
NetBSD-i386-4.99.16-install.iso    24-Mar-2007 04:14  233M

I think we deserve some help from NetBSD developers. Let there be a page from where I can choose appropriate ISO for testing.

1) NetBSD 3.1
2) NetBSD 3.1.1 (aka bla, bla, bla)
2) NetBSD 4.0_BETA2 (aka 3.99.yyyy)
3) NetBSD 5.0 (aka 4.99.xxxx)

And the hell with the 4.99.xxx, 3.99.yyy etc. For developers the major or minor designations  are of great value helping them keep the releases tidy and in consistant way. For the users they create hurdles, more, they are thorns in the a**.

How many more such scare aways will I find in a future which permeates not only NetBSD's but other distributions or Open Source systems' cultures?

Regards,
pp
--
Przemysław Pawełczyk <pp@kv.net.pl>

--Signature=_Sat__24_Mar_2007_11_38_11_-0500_Mwy1N/Ei3L=fUG0c
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFGBVPzD9+eS/1tsfYRAs39AJ0bA3jqnSrUCN7tL9vnIGLJHfXFQwCfVLu0
xfoA4k7JfgPOldFca6/YJHA=
=7yfx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature=_Sat__24_Mar_2007_11_38_11_-0500_Mwy1N/Ei3L=fUG0c--