I think I will be putting up 5.0.17 for a release vote later today or early tomorrow. A subsequent vote will identify it as the GA release.
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 5:03 AM, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree with Massimo's sentiments. > -- > Kevin > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Massimo Lusetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> > Looks like there's a couple of nits in 5.0.16. My intention is to >> > build a 5.0.17 to collect the couple of critical bug fixes. I don't >> > see what we'll need to restart the "GA exposure period"; I think the >> > three weeks (*) should start from 5.0.16. In other words, I would >> > like (when its ready) a single vote for 5.0.17 to make it public and >> > make it the GA release. Does this seem reasonable? >> > >> > The point is, the RC is working: bugs are being fleshed out. What >> > we're trying to accomplish with the RC is determine if the release >> > voted GA is truly free of (blocker) bugs. My contention is that the >> > experience from 5.0.16 combined with a couple of bug fixes should be >> > as sufficient as voting up 5.0.17 and waiting another N weeks. >> > >> > (*) Three weeks is arbitrary. Is it long enough or too long? >> >> If no such a big bugs comes out from that three weeks from 5.0.16 that >> sound reasonable. >> >> BTW three weeks are a nice period for a release to be fully used and i >> don't feel that to be too long. >> >> Regards >> -- >> Massimo >> http://meridio.blogspot.com >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
