[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: 1.7.0 blocking issues / branching

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:10:59 -0400

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 15:08, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 02:33:04PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> Given that the most common distinction between alpha and beta is
>> "feature complete" I have been arguing all along that the existing
>> "alpha" release should have been labelled "beta".  I would be +1 on
>> changing that for the next release before we branch.
> There have been new (small) features and APIs added since alpha1,
> e.g. mime-type detection with libmagic.
> Once we've branched we'll start the review process for backports,
> which will put a definite end to new functionality being added.
> I'd say just call the first release from the branch "beta" if there are
> known blockers, and call it "RC1" if there are no known blockers.
> Until we branch, we should keep calling them "alpha".

I would still like us to consider a "beta" release, regardless. I
would be very uncomfortable moving from alpha straight to RC1. I just
don't have the confidence that the codebase is a 1.7.0 release at the
point we branch.


ps. and if you *don't* think it is good enough for 1.7.0, then it sure
isn't an RC1. if we roll RC*, then we can't say "oh, but it isn't
final. we'll have bugs to fix." that isn't an RC. seen too much of
that nonsense in the past...
Received on 2011-06-15 22:11:43 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.