Has anyone commented that on your release naming policy? Maybe you’ve got a good reason for including “RC” in release names, but I wanted to point out that they look strange to people.
Josh Elser just included Kerby 1.0.0-RC2 in Apache Calcite’s Avatica sub-project[1], and my first reaction was, “Why is he including a release candidate as a dependency?” We have a policy of not depending on release candidates or snapshots. In Apache, a release candidate has not necessarily passed a vote, so is not necessarily “clean” from an IP standpoint. Your releases are clean (I found the vote thread[2]) but they look “dirty”. If you had named the release ‘1.0.1-beta’ it would have captured the fact that you viewed it as beta quality but still distinguished it from other releases and the release candidate(s) of that release. Julian [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1184 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1184> [2] https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/directory-dev/201603.mbox/%3c9037bced616a964eb486b12fca9dcfcf03b18...@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com%3E <https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/directory-dev/201603.mbox/%3c9037bced616a964eb486b12fca9dcfcf03b18...@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com%3E>
