Policy for removing working code
swhetzel at gmail.com
Thu Sep 9 09:42:19 UTC 2010
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:22 AM, <perryh at pluto.rain.com> wrote:
> John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> We can't e-mail announce@ every time something is going to
>> be removed. That would be way too much spam for that list.
> That may depend on how often something substantial is removed :)
>> I do think stable@ is a good place to e-mail ...
> Good, perhaps even "necessary", but is it "sufficient"? Those
> following a -STABLE branch are expected to read stable@, but
> what about those who are following a security branch?
If someone is following a RELENG_X (a.k.a -STABLE) or a RELENG_X_Y (a
errata fix branch), then they should be reading the stable@ list.
More information about the freebsd-stable