On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 09:03PM, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 31.03.2015 17:46, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 7:44 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 31.03.2015 16:00, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > >>> 8) It would be good to avoid all those "RC RCs" as it's confusing to > >>> have multiple levels of release candidates - in Apache, a Release > >>> Candidate is this particular thing you are asking us to vote over. > >>> (this might have been pointed out earlier). A pre-release can be > >>> called anything else, like alpha, golden master, etc. > >>> https://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what > >> We've been through this and I disagree. Do not confuse release process > >> with release naming. That page conflates the two, which makes it just a > >> bit broken IMO. There are no rules for release naming "in Apache". > > It would be more apparent that the podling has their release process under > > control if the release-process-candidates being iterated on were clearly > > differentiated using unambiguous directory names, Git tag names, etc. > > > > For example, the last vote could have been on... > > > > http://people.apache.org/~dsetrakyan/ignite-1.0.0-RC3-rc2 > > GIT tag release-1.0.0-RC3-rc2 > > > > ... and this vote could have been on: > > > > http://people.apache.org/~dsetrakyan/ignite-1.0.0-rc0 > > GIT tag release-1.0.0-rc0 > > > > That's still a little hard to follow, but at least it distinguishes > > different > > release-process-candidates from each other. > > Oh, that's a different matter entirely. Release process needs polishing > and documenting (and scripting and automating), I agree; up to now, it's > been mostly about getting the licensing stuff squared away. One step at > a time. :)
Indeed! Cos --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
