Dear Fop Devs,

I think we are mixing two ideas here:

One idea (1) was to release 0.95rc, and then two weeks later 0.95

The other idea (2) is to release 0.95 and call it 0.95rc instead of 0.95beta.

(1) I think makes sense. It would mean after releasing the rc there
would be a short phase (2 weeks) where only bugfixed could be
commited. This is a good idea anyways. +1

(2) The traditional dev steps are alpha - beta - final. Some companies
use Release Candidate to make their beta-phase sound nicer. I strongly
disagree of the use of this word without actually meaning it - as long
as this is not a feature-complete version of fop 1.0 I'd vote -1 for
calling it rc.

Btw: Other projects, such as GNOME and eclipse have a strong
time-based release plan. Maybe this would be a good idea for the fop
project as well? It would give users (and plugin developers) more
certainty about whats going on.


2008/1/11, J.Pietschmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >> So, what about a 0.95 beta?
> >
> > Like Chris, I'd prefer calling it a release candidate, but +1 to the
> > general idea.
> I like the idea of an release candidate too.
> J.Pietschmann

Reply via email to