On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 01:08:28PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On 15/08/06, Matthias Scheler <tron@zhadum.org.uk> wrote:
> >In article <20060815124549.GA19604@lori.ghen.be>, Geert Hendrickx
> ><ghen@NetBSD.org> writes:
> >> 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.
> 
> I agree, there's no ambiguity about what the 3.0.0_PATCH branch should 
> contain.

So, we'll do it this way in the future?  

	Geert