On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 2:25 PM Maarten Mulders <mthmuld...@apache.org> wrote: > > That definition makes a lot of sense to me. If we would adhere to it, we > should discipline ourselves after "a" next RC and *not* accept any code > changes *except* for fixing critical uses.
Be careful not to let the tail wag the dog. if changes are needed, they're needed. You just need another RC. I would actually prefer that RCs be identical to the release aside from version number, or even better that the release candidate binary could simply become the release, but that's not really how the Maven release process works. However, critical bug fixes should generate a new RC. Overall I would prefer much more rigorous versioning. Right now we're pushing RCs with known unstable APIs, which I would normally consider appropriate for pre-alpha builds. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elh...@ibiblio.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
