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. Max 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 >
