From: "Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 7:05 PM


> On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 03:53:29PM -0500, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> > When we *do* go GA, are we planning on keeping this numbering?
> > I think it'll confuse and dismay the public..
> 
> AIUI, I think we will be keeping this numbering.  I don't think
> it'll confuse the public because when we release/announce a
> version, it'll contain a qualifier - i.e. alpha/beta/GA.  So,
> we could have:
> 
> 2.0.31 Beta
> 2.0.32 GA
> 2.0.33 Alpha
> 2.0.34 GA
> 2.0.35 Beta
> 
> Each version is independently judged as to its worthiness.

No... each release -evolves- in it's worthiness...

2.0.31 Alpha  --- good reports/we like; so...
2.0.31 Beta   --- bugs reported from users X GA

2.0.32 Alpha  --- good reports/we like; so...
2.0.32 Beta   --- many good reports from users; so...
2.0.32 GA     --- released to the world!

2.0.33 Alpha  --- tagged - and big bug found; X Beta

2.0.34 Alpha  --- good reports/we like; so...
2.0.34 Beta   --- many good reports from users; so...
2.0.34 GA     --- better than 2.0.32!

2.0.34 Alpha  --- It looked good to us...
2.0.35 Beta   --- but mod_foo was busted X GA

Does that make sense?  I very much believe the user communities' feedback
should be considered in the beta -> ga transition.  But 1.3.1x/2x's have
proven that we don't always know best :)

Bill



Reply via email to