+1 On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote:
> seems reasonable to me > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Joe Percivall < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hey Team, > > > > The big ticket elements of 1.0 look to be in a pretty good state. Lots of > > things left to tighten up, primarily docs and bug fixes, but, it seems > wise > > for a major release like this to first kick out a Beta[1]. The relevant > > section of the Apache.org link: > > > > Releases that are believed to be usable by testers and developers > > outside the project, but perhaps not yet stable in terms of features > or > > functionality, are usually referred to as "beta" or "unstable". > > > > This will enable us to will open up to the broader base of users that > > normally don't build from source to help test and give us a couple weeks > of > > feedback to work with before we do a formal 1.0 release vote. > > > > If no one has any objections, I will start an RC vote for it later this > > week. > > > > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#release-types > > > > Joe > > - - - - - - > > Joseph Percivall > > linkedin.com/in/Percivall > > e: [email protected] > > >
