>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ronan Flood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steve Kostecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 2006-03-24, Harlan Stenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> We already have patched tarball snapshots - what do you see as the >>> benefit of an RC2? >> >> A formal declaration that all bugs have been fixed and that _this_ is the >> version you wish to release. Ronan> Yeah, that's what I had in mind. If no one finds issues with it Ronan> within some defined time, it becomes 4.2.1 and is announced. OK, so y'all want there to be an RC release that is identical to the released version? I can do that, and: - there were not that many changes between RC1 and today's tarball snapshot - when we release 4.2.1 it will become ntp-stable and we already have tarball snapshots of onging changes to both ntp-stable and ntp-dev Perhaps I'm seeing this from a different angle or perhaps I'm missing something. How about I get rid of the '1' in RC1 and I just release 4.2.1 when "sufficient" time has passed since the last change? If so, I'm inclined to say "let's treat the '1' in 'RC1' as silent for this release" and go with this approach for future release candidates? H _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
