Dave Korn wrote: > I'm ok with that, asuming that the answers to these two questions are > reasonable and proportionate to a Rea-Soon-Now release timeframe:
Well see that's the problem with this plan -- there have been so many changes since the last release that I'd want to do a RC first and advertise its existance on the main list for a week or two of public tire kicking or so before going live. Past experience has always shown that this is required because virtually nobody follows the -apps lists and does regular testing of snapshots, and problems always seem to crop up. But, alternatively, if we decide just to go with the release branch+verification backport I think we can bypass this and just go live now if you're confident enough about it. But when the idea of slipping in more and more things comes up I start to feel uneasy and want to go back to having a public RC to prevent egg on our face. Do you see the dilemma? I'd really rather not rush a release with a bunch of changes, so can we just push out the verification change only and then work on stabilizing HEAD and doing a RC without the time pressure? Brian