On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 15:08, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 02:33:04PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote: >> Given that the most common distinction between alpha and beta is >> "feature complete" I have been arguing all along that the existing >> "alpha" release should have been labelled "beta". I would be +1 on >> changing that for the next release before we branch. > > There have been new (small) features and APIs added since alpha1, > e.g. mime-type detection with libmagic. > > Once we've branched we'll start the review process for backports, > which will put a definite end to new functionality being added. > I'd say just call the first release from the branch "beta" if there are > known blockers, and call it "RC1" if there are no known blockers. > Until we branch, we should keep calling them "alpha".
I would still like us to consider a "beta" release, regardless. I would be very uncomfortable moving from alpha straight to RC1. I just don't have the confidence that the codebase is a 1.7.0 release at the point we branch. Cheers, -g ps. and if you *don't* think it is good enough for 1.7.0, then it sure isn't an RC1. if we roll RC*, then we can't say "oh, but it isn't final. we'll have bugs to fix." that isn't an RC. seen too much of that nonsense in the past...
