On 05.11.2013 23:02, Andreas Stieger wrote:
> On 04/11/13 23:39, Ben Reser wrote:
>> One of the things we discussed in Berlin was that we wanted to produce alphas
>> off trunk so that users would have an earlier opportunity to provide feedback.
>> Branko has been proding me for the past two weeks to get a 1.9.0 alpha started.
>> So to that end I'd like to suggest that next week we produce a 1.9.0-alpha1
>> off trunk.
> Isn't "producing an alpha" essentially just the same as pointing people
> at a specific tarball made from a trunk revision that the project
> considers worthy of testing? This already exists:
> I don't suppose you want whole signing off dance?
Yes. It's still an Apache release, which is a bit different from
checking out trunk or some grabbing some randomly generated tarballs.
> This being a source based release, any alpha tester would already know
> how to get and a build form a nightly tarball or source tree checkout.
> So doesn't this just boil down to a project communication to the
> intended audience outlining the state of development and inviting
> specific testing and feedback from interested users? That is, unless you
> also reach out to distribution package maintainers, binary vendors and
> integrators who may produce (properly marked) binaries?
> Also, mind you, if you produce an alpha you encourage feedback on it
> while discouraging anything on changes later in trunk until you produce
> another. How does this compare to "test trunk_at_123 which has XZY, which
> we call alphaN"?
Not at all. Alpha doesn't mean that features and APIs are cast in
concrete. Rather, it's a chance for interested parties to give feedback
/before/ they're finalized. And it's easier to actually find interested
parties if you give them a "blessed" release rather than expecting them
to look for a random trunk revision.
Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion
WANdisco // Non-Stop Data
Received on 2013-11-06 02:24:11 CET