Production Or Not How Do you know that ? I don't know

[Charles Swiger]

On Dec 15, 2003, at 2:09 PM, Vahric MUHTARYAN wrote:
> Hi Everybody ,
>
> 	I'm watching the list too much time Everybody said that 4.9 for
> production evn. And Maybe 5.2 will be for production env. Could you say
> witch list I have to watch for this release will be for production env.

<freebsd-stable at freebsd.org> is the mailing list you should be watching 
if you are running 4.9, which is the "recommended production 
evironment" at this time.

> 	And I don't understand why all release products can't used for
> production env . because I red documents and mails said that

"Can't be used" is too strong; you are welcome to test any version of 
the code  you like and put it into production if it seems to suit your 
requirements.

> -- CURRENT have feture options and for testing env. 
> -- STABLE is more better then CURRENT but it's not for prodcution too
> ...
> -- RELESE is more better then STABLE , tested more then STABLE and have
> cleared code but Why all of releases are not for production env .

A RELEASE of the -STABLE branch, such as the 4.9 release, is more 
carefully tested than interim conditions between releases.

> 	Somebody said that all 5.x releases was the bleeding edge
> development versions at this moment Why you are say 5.1 RELEASE ...

You are right that it is confusing to users to see releases come out 
with a higher version number (ie, 5.0, 5.1) which are not "better" than 
4.8 or 4.9.

However, the goal is to get 5.x to the point where it is "better" for 
most production users than 4.x is, at which point the FreeBSD people 
will promote 5.x to -STABLE instead of -CURRENT.  It's hard to get 5.x 
to that point without generating at least one full RELEASE for people 
to use, test, and encounter problems with.

-- 
-Chuck