On 12/13/06, David Glasser <glasser@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 12/13/06, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net> wrote:
> > We *always* do "eat our own dogfood" testing before releasing to the
> > public. We call them release candidates. They come with warnings about
> > possible unforeseen concerns, but they also come with reasonable levels
> > of confidence that, in fact, we aren't really going to break anything
> > badly if someone decides to run the RC.
>
> I do think that running something more specific than "random versions
> of the trunk" make sense. However, if a "release candidate" is really
> something that we could consider releasing if it isn't too buggy,
> maybe we need something different here. Perhaps after making the 1.5
> branch we could roll an "alpha", which we have no plans to release but
> that we recommend people who care about merging play around with?
That would make a lot of sense to me. The whole reason I want to
start running trunk is so we can play around with merge tracking. If
we wait for an RC to do that, it makes it kind of hard to say "wait a
minute, this isn't gonna work, we need to change X, Y, and absolutely
positively rewrite Z".
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Dec 13 23:43:08 2006