ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?!

[J. T. Farmer]

Volker wrote:
>> This should be documented somewhere clearly then, as my understanding was that -STABLE meant that anything MFCd back to it *was* tested and deemed stable ... and yes, I do run stable, and yes, I do expect to hit the occasional 'oopses', but "blantant and obvious bugs due to insufficient testing", IMHO, doesn't classify as an 'oops' ....
>>
>>     
>
> Guys,
>
> we're talking about software. Have you ever seen a piece of software
> which has been really bug-free? Not the hello-world, I'm talking
> about real software.
>
> Also, you should never go with -STABLE on a production server. I'm
> sure this has been made clear in the handbook. If it's really a that
> import server in production use, go with a RELEASE. -STABLE is not a
> technology playground as CURRENT but should be seen as a BETA
> testing system. If that's not the case, then why use RELEASE at all?
>   
Pardon me, but I do have to interject a very large laugh here.  What's the
first recommendation that's made _every_ time someone posts a problem
with a -RELEASE installation?  It's "Well, go update to -STABLE and then
we will might be able to help you."

Simply put, running a -RELEASE means that you _are_ running software
with _known_ problems.

I'm very thankful for all the work that people put into FreeBSD.  However,
that doesn't blind me to problems with the current setup.  It may be the 
best
that we have, it may be better than the Linux world, but that doesn't 
mean that
it solves all our problems and that we can't improve it.

John    (FreeBSD since 2.0.x on an AMD K5-100 with 16MB of ram...)

------------------------------------------------------------------
John T. Farmer          Owner & CTO              GoldSword Systems
jfarmer at goldsword.com   865-691-6498             Knoxville TN
    Consulting, Design, & Development of Networks & Software