C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Paul Burba wrote:
>>> I would suggest letting people continue testing RC1 for a while
>>> until the
>>> rate of finding serious bugs falls off, unless testing is being
>>> impeded by
>>> these bugs. If we just release RC2 right now, we would statistically
>>> expect
>>> serious bugs to be found in it at a similar rate, so what would be the
>>> point?
>>>
>>> (A while might be 1 or 2 weeks?)
>>
>> Hi Julian,
>>
>> It's probably obvious that I disagree with waiting, since I suggested
>> RC2, but I'll come right out and say it: I disagree :-)
>
> Yeah, same here. It's pretty obvious that RC1 isn't likely to get much
> more testing -- these things happen in bursts, and (as Paul noted
> elsewhere in his mail) RC1 isn't even publicly released yet. Most of
> the developer testing done to sign a release involves strict use of the
> test suite. This burst of additional issues at all was the result of
> adhoc testing. So, if the goal is ride the statistical wave of
> find-rates today, we need to actually get the code into more people's
> hands. And to do that requires actually releasing something. It ain't
> RC1 though, because we now know without a doubt that that snapshot is
> *not* a potential candidate for release.
>
> +1 on an RC2, shooting for, perhaps, Monday morning, first thing?
I'd actually like to roll RC2 tomorrow morning some time (or even
tonight if everything gets nominated and merged that needs it). I don't
think that it is unreasonable to clear out STATUS before then.
Aside from Dave's back-compat changes mentioned elsethread, are there
any other pending issues which need to be resolved before RC2?
-Hyrum
Received on 2008-04-10 16:41:01 CEST