On 1/9/08, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There have been a few discussions on the legal-discuss mailing list about > the release process and building Release Candidates that are just rebuilt > to > make a final version when everybody is okay is more and more frowned upon > for diverse reasons.
Digest for those of us not on legal-discuss? So as you'll see I'm now using the final version > numbers, I just name differently the directory in which I publish them. > Also > note that even though we publish binaries, the reference for any release > is > the source package. Binaries are just there for convenience. If the RC is good enough that we end cutting an official release, then I don't see a problem with that. But if the RC needs fixing, then you might end up with two packages having the same name but different content, which is a problem. Putting it in a different URL doesn't help much, once it hits my machine, it loses the source or origin and for all I know 1.1.1 is 1.1.1, whichever 1.1.1 it ends up being. So -1 on releasing two versions with the same version number. Assaf With this in mind, I'm asking for a vote on the following distributions: > > > http://people.apache.org/~mriou/ode-1.1.1RC2/org/apache/ode/apache-ode-sources/1.1.1/apache-ode-sources-1.1.1.zip > > http://people.apache.org/~mriou/ode-1.1.1RC2/org/apache/ode/apache-ode-war/1.1.1/apache-ode-war-1.1.1.zip > > http://people.apache.org/~mriou/ode-1.1.1RC2/org/apache/ode/apache-ode-jbi/1.1.1/apache-ode-jbi-1.1.1.zip > > And here is my +1. > > Thanks, > Matthieu >
