In article <20060815124549.GA19604@lori.ghen.be>,
	Geert Hendrickx <ghen@NetBSD.org> writes:
>> This way we get consistent messages along the development process.
>>  Otherwise, STABLE could carry no message while a RC could, disappearing
>> again after the real formal release.  With this change only formal releases
>> do not carry any special message in motd.
> 
> I agree with this change for stable branches like netbsd-3, but not for
> security branches like netbsd-3-0.  It doesn't seem appropriate to call
> those "development snapshots", IMHO.  

That's good point. People might have to install them to get a security
fix (before it's part of a release) and won't like their system as
being marked as an unstable version becaose of that.

> I'd propose to call NetBSD versions on a security branch e.g. 3.0.0_PATCH
> (instead of _STABLE).  What do other people think about this?  

I like 3.0.0_PATCH because it avoids the very similar looking names like
3.0.0_STABLE and 3.0_STABLE for branches with different purpose.

	Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://scheler.de/~matthias/