From owner-doc-jp@jp.freebsd.org  Thu Sep  4 12:40:58 1997
Received: by jaz.jp.freebsd.org (8.8.7+2.7Wbeta7/8.7.3) id MAA14638
	Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:40:58 +0900 (JST)
Received: by jaz.jp.freebsd.org (8.8.7+2.7Wbeta7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA14631
	for <doc-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:40:55 +0900 (JST)
Received: from tomato.nwk.cl.nec.co.jp (root@tomato.nwk.cl.nec.co.jp [133.207.2.50]) by research.gate.nec.co.jp (8.8.7+2.7Wbeta7/970901) with ESMTP id MAA11642; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:40:54 +0900 (JST)
Received: from nwk.cl.nec.co.jp by tomato.nwk.cl.nec.co.jp (8.8.5+2.7Wbeta5/NWK-950510) with ESMTP
	id MAA04549; Thu, 4 Sep 1997 12:40:51 +0900 (JST)
To: doc-jp@jp.freebsd.org, kuriyama@opt.phys.waseda.ac.jp
From: hino@ccm.cl.nec.co.jp
In-Reply-To: kuriyama@opt.phys.waseda.ac.jp's message of "Thu, 04 Sep 97 11:18:01
	 +0900"
References: <199709040238.LAA19017@wise19.mn.waseda.ac.jp>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.54 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-2022-jp
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 12:40:50 +0900
Message-ID: <11667.873344450@nwk.cl.nec.co.jp>
Reply-To: doc-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Distribute: distribute [version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel=20]
X-Sequence: doc-jp 3195
Subject: [doc-jp 3195] Re: [FAQ] preface.sgml
Errors-To: owner-doc-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-doc-jp@jp.freebsd.org

>> On Thu, 04 Sep 97 11:18:01 +0900, kuriyama@opt.phys.waseda.ac.jp
>> (Jun Kuriyama) said:
:> $B!!$A$g$C$HJ8L.$,HyL/$J$N$G%"%I%P%$%9$*4j$$$7$^$9!#0UL#$r<h$j0c$($F$$$J$1$l$P(B
:> $B$$$$$s$G$9$,!D!D!#(Bversion control tools $B$d$i!"8E$$%V%i%s%A$KBP$9$k%9%?%s%9$C(B
:> $B$F$N$O$3$&$$$&46$8$G$$$$$s$G$7$g$&$+!)(B

$BBgBN(BOK$B$J$N$G$O!D(B
$B$G$b>/!95$$K$J$kItJ,$,$"$C$?$N$GLu$7D>$7$F$_$^$7$?!%(B

:> <sect1> 
:>   <heading>Why is the -stable branch ending with 2.1.7? </heading>
:>   <p>
:>     While we'd certainly like to be able to continue both branches of
:>     development, we've found that the version control tools available to 
:>     us are not particularly well-suited for this; in fact, they quickly 
:>     result in a maintenance nightmare for any branch which lives much 
:>     beyond 2-3 months. The -stable branch has, by contrast, lasted for 
:>     well over a year and what little sanity the FreeBSD developers have 
:>     left would be in serious jeopardy if we continued in this way.  
:>     Perhaps in the future we'll figure out another model which gives 
:>     everyone what they want, and we are working on such a model, but in 
:>     the meantime it's probably best to think of -stable coming to an end 
:>     with 2.1.7-RELEASE.

<heading>-stable $B%V%i%s%A$,(B 2.1.7 $B$G=*$o$C$F$7$^$&$N$O$J$<$G$9$+(B? 
</heading>
<p>

$BN>%V%i%s%A$N3+H/$rB3$1$?$$$N$O$d$^$d$^$J$N$G$9$,!";DG0$J$,$i$3$N$h$&$J(B
$B>u67$r8zN(E*$K07$($k%P!<%8%g%s4IM}%D!<%k$,$^$@B8:_$7$J$$$N$G$9!#8=:_2f!9(B
$B$,;H$C$F$$$k%D!<%k$G!"J#?t$N%V%i%s%A$r?t%+7n0J>e$ND94|4V$KEO$C$FJB9T$7(B
$B$F%P!<%8%g%s4IM}$7B3$1$k$3$H$O!"$^$5$K0-L4$N$h$&$J:n6H$J$N$G$9!#(B
$B0lJ}$G(B-stable $B%V%i%s%A$O0lG/0J>e$bB3$$$F$$$^$9$+$i!"(BFreeBSD $B$N3+H/<T(B
$B$?$A$N:n6H$NBgJQ$5$r9M$($k$H!"$3$N$^$^7QB3$9$k$3$H$O?<9o$JLdBj$K4Y$j$+(B
$B$M$^$;$s!#(B 
$B$*$=$i$/$_$s$J$,K>$`$b$N$rDs6!$7$F$/$l$k$h$&$JJ}K!$,$=$N$&$A9M$(=P$5$l(B
$B$k$G$7$g$&$7!"$^$?!"2f!9$b$=$N$h$&$JJ}K!$K$D$$$F8!F$Cf$J$N$G$9$,!"8=>u(B
$B$G$O(B -stable $B%V%i%s%A$r(B 2.1.7-RELEASE $B$G=*$o$j$K$9$k$H$$$&$3$H$,:GA1$N(B
$B<jCJ$G$"$k$H9M$($F$$$^$9!#(B

$BF|Ln(B@NEC
