On 27 July 2012 08:22, Francesco Chicchiriccò <ilgro...@apache.org> wrote: > On 27/07/2012 08:13, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: >> >> Le 7/27/12 1:02 AM, Joe Schaefer a écrit : >>> >>> I believe Bill is complaining not about the venue, >>> but the choice of referring to this package as >>> a "release candidate" instead of simply dropping >>> the "RC" portion of the package name like other >>> projects typically do with approved candidates. >> >> >> Ah, ok. Makes sense then. >> >> My perception is that the Syncope guys are trying to cut a 1.0.0, instead >> of going through many 0.x.0 before, therefore they are iterating on RC atm. > > > Indeed, yes. > > >> It's pretty much semantic, IMHO. >
In other ASF projects I've seen, the convention is to use -alpha1 or -beta2 etc. to designate such stages. Release Candidate (RC) has a specific meaning in the ASF, as it is what is voted on before release. So one would vote on 1.0.0-beta3-incubating-RCn and a successful vote would result in the release of 1.0.0-beta3-incubating A failed vote for RCn would normally result in trying again with RCn+1 to address the cause of the failure. > Thanks! > > >> Do incubator peeps think it's a wrong approach? > > > I hope it's not: anyway, this RC3 should be the last one before actual > 1.0.0-incubating. > > Regards. > > -- > Francesco Chicchiriccò > > ASF Member, Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member > http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
