Hi, "Eric Y. Kow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Perhaps. Indeed, one month feature releases look a bit too ambitious, > but putting release candidates on a monthly cycle seems sensible. please, pretty please, just don't call them release candidates... I know Linux (the kernel) does it that way, but we don't have to copy every bad practice... ; - )
Release candidate is a version of software, that is likely to become a release, unless critical issues are found. What you mean is an alpha release -- mostly a development snapshot that have gotten some basic field testing and is intended for testing a piece of in-development software. When feature-completeness is reached, betas are released, where it is expected that bugs are gradually fixed, until it is considered stable enough for a release. *Then* you make a release candidate, and if testing doesn't show release-blocking problems, you re-pack the same rc tree as a release. If you find any (critical) problems, you fix them, make another rc and wait for testers again. Does that make sense? (That's why it's a release *candidate*: it is trying to become a release...) Yours, Petr. -- Peter Rockai | me()mornfall!net | prockai()redhat!com http://blog.mornfall.net | http://web.mornfall.net "In My Egotistical Opinion, most people's C programs should be indented six feet downward and covered with dirt." -- Blair P. Houghton on the subject of C program indentation _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
