Rick Hillegas wrote: > Andrew McIntyre wrote: ... >> The counterargument posted in one of the release policy threads >> mentioned earlier was that if you really want to get the user >> community involved in an alpha or beta test, mark the release >> artifacts as such, put it to a proper vote, and if the vote passes, >> put it on the mirrors and announce it as a beta release and call for
I've noticed this is what torque does. Main point is it has gone through the process to make it a formal (beta) release. >> testing. The quality threshold for a beta release is essentially none, >> so a vote to have a beta release will almost necessarily pass, unless >> there are legal issues that come up. Having the vote in the archives right, legal has to be covered. >> shows due diligence to the release process, which is important for any >> artifacts that are distributed outside of the development community. >> >> andrew >> > I think this is a promising idea. It would be great if we could get > early alpha-feedback on 10.4 long before we plunge into the release > proper. The process you describe, however, is awkward for a trunk > snapshot: The snapshooter has to wait a week for a vote to end before > posting the snapshot. On a volatile codebase like trunk, a snapshot's > value degrades rapidly in just a week. maybe look at the torque archives to see how they specifically have handled it -- or even ask on [EMAIL PROTECTED] -jean
