"release candidate"

[Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>]

I've had a request from a user that we stop calling the betas "release
candidates", since we've been doing that since 1.2b4 and well... um.  You
know the story. 

Suppose that 1.2b11 becomes 1.2.  What is our next step?  The list of
submitted features that are good is pretty big, and we've got a bunch of
ports (at least 5 PRs with simple changes for new platforms) waiting.  Do
we just commit 'em all and call it 1.2.1? 

But that doesn't seem like a subrelease to me.  It sounds more like 1.3. 

Dean

Re: "release candidate"

[Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>]

On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Marc Slemko wrote:
> The next step is we branch the tree and begin discussion, bickering,
> arguing, fighting and perhaps even development on 2.0.  Then any fixes to
> 1.2 come as they come.  

I just want to bicker, no discussion allowed!

Dean

Re: "release candidate"

[Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>]

On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> I've had a request from a user that we stop calling the betas "release
> candidates", since we've been doing that since 1.2b4 and well... um.  You
> know the story. 
> 
> Suppose that 1.2b11 becomes 1.2.  What is our next step?  The list of
> submitted features that are good is pretty big, and we've got a bunch of
> ports (at least 5 PRs with simple changes for new platforms) waiting.  Do
> we just commit 'em all and call it 1.2.1? 
> 
> But that doesn't seem like a subrelease to me.  It sounds more like 1.3. 

The next step is we branch the tree and begin discussion, bickering,
arguing, fighting and perhaps even development on 2.0.  Then any fixes to
1.2 come as they come.  

> 
> Dean
>