On 11/27/05, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree that release candidates can be helpful with checking packaging > errors (and testing against TCK which is not an issue in this case.)
That's true, Sean, but what you may not know is that over a year ago, we had a very long discussion on dev@ about the release process. In the end, we decided that Apache Struts would *not* issue distributions that were tagged with arbitrary qualifiers like "beta" or "release candidate". Each and every non-nightly distribution would be a milestone with it's own unique version number expressed as three integers (major.minor.milestone). Witness the Struts 1.2.x series for this process in action. We worked very hard to educate people as to the "milestone-only" release scheme, and I am concerned that calling anything a "release candidate" again will only cause confusion. It is my feeling that the so-called 1.0.0-rc1 should be tagged as the 1.0.0 distribution, and the subsequent distribution should be 1.0.1. If 1.0.1 becomes a GA release, that would be great. If it doesn't, then 1.0.2 can be next up to bat. -Ted. > > I'm +1 for getting some kind of "official" release soon. I think more > users will feel comfortable jumping in once Shale is released. I > think we should quickly shift our attention to the multiple dialog > issue though because that is a severe limitation that users will > complain about. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
