On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10 April 2013 21:30, Justin Ross <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Robbie Gemmell >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I was about to ask if you could elaborate on what you meant in my other >> > reply when I saw this mail arive to answer my question. >> > >> > At this point we don't really anticpate requiring extra time in the >> overall >> > schedule (which if I'm following right, seems to be on track for RC2 end >> of >> > this week, RC3 end of next week, vote the week after if all is good?). >> > Moving RC2 to Monday might let us get some more final changes into it, >> but >> > I understand if you'd like to release it on Friday in case anyone else >> > wants to hack on things at the weekend :) >> >> To be frank, I think it's inadvisable to make improvements this late, >> even if you're careful, without adding more time in the schedule for >> testing. Unintended consequences happen to everyone. >> > > I'm not really arguing against taking more time, I was just trying to > convey that we don't anticipate introducing a need for additional time in > the event that was the primary concern. That is, we would rather make the > changes on the same schedule versus not making the changes at all if it > needed more time. I'd be happy to bump RC2 or 3 out a week, or add RC4 if > necessary.
Okay, then I think it's better if we bump things out at least a little. Proposal: reset RC2 for 19 April. Justin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
