On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 03:00:05AM +0200, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> First, you forget that for the vast majority of end users, treating RC's as
> releases is going to be nightmarish. RC's are a reality check before
> release, and so far, we haven't had a single RC that was release
> worthy. Just imagine how much headaches we solved employing this approach.
you are misrepresenting what i said. in what i am saying, something
with a number is not automatically release quality, is not
automatically listed alongside other releases, and is in absolutely no
way different from what we currently tag with a version number that
happens to contain the string 'RC' in it.
(yes, we haven't had a 'pl' since 4.0.4. of course, that's just
because it was decided the memlimit fix for 4.0.6 didn't merit a 'pl'
designation. my point was simply that instead of ever making use of
that middle digit in our release numbers, we just sometimes tack on a
extra digit at the end, and that seems silly to me.)
and i do question, a little bit, how successful our new release
strategy is when we only seem to be able to muster a new release every
three months. but maybe that's a pace we're happy with. and of course,
that has way more to do with a great many more issues than how we
number the releases. :)
jim
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
