From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikb1LGs=rXA8kQA=umKGQwTekXUGRXw9_ywiFPJ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimtHKZaz0Q1fJJT+P1oT0As+-x20cgKrBdeLEHP@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikb1LGs=rXA8kQA=umKGQwTekXUGRXw9_ywiFPJ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:27:17 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTimwPa3L6CCBg6FPoYwiAKO1fT5sGduMwTUcvLKv@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jacek Masiulaniec <jacekm@dobremiasto.net>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b2a79a86-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On 15 February 2011 08:08, Fernan Bolando <fernanbolando@mailc.net> wrote:
> i have always considered 9atom and a few other independent plan9 stuff
> as something similar to the openbsd release strategy. Theres a stable
> release and a current. 9atom is more like openbsd-current it's
> bleeding edge, but it should be _more_ stable and has _more_ hardware
> support. The official iso is more like openbsd-stable unless something
> is broken you will only see bug fixes, until bell-labs considers the
> new stuff as stable.

This is near total misrepresentation of the OpenBSD release process.