rhabarba to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months agoOpenBSD has reached OpenBSD of Theseusmarc.infoexternal-linkmessage-square10fedilinkarrow-up1124arrow-down14cross-posted to: hackernews@lemmy.smeargle.fansopenbsd@lemmy.sdf.org
arrow-up1120arrow-down1external-linkOpenBSD has reached OpenBSD of Theseusmarc.inforhabarba to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 4 months agomessage-square10fedilinkcross-posted to: hackernews@lemmy.smeargle.fansopenbsd@lemmy.sdf.org
minus-squarerhabarbaOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7arrow-down3·4 months agoYes, it is, because it does the job. Why exactly shouldn’t they?
minus-squarechellomere@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·4 months agoFor example, maybe branching is something you’d like to be able to do without it being a nightmare?
minus-squarerhabarbaOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·4 months agoOpenBSD seems to be able to have branches (CURRENT and STABLE), and they seem to be able to manage them just fine.
Yes, it is, because it does the job. Why exactly shouldn’t they?
For example, maybe branching is something you’d like to be able to do without it being a nightmare?
OpenBSD seems to be able to have branches (CURRENT and STABLE), and they seem to be able to manage them just fine.