Em terça-feira, 20 de dezembro de 2016, às 13:34:39 BRST, Tuukka Turunen escreveu: > If desired, we could use some other name than "Release Candidate 1" for the > release that begins the last phase of the release. It could be called "Beta > 2" or "Technology preview", if so desired. Personally, I would call it > "Release Candidate 1". > > The difference to our current process is quite small. In essence it would be > about considering the "RC1" the beginning of the final releasing phase (.0 > branch), not something we do almost at the end of it. I believe that > lowering the quality criterial for "RC1" helps us in being more efficient > as it has been in practice impossible to really fulfill the current process > goal and have already the first RC as good as the final.
I like the process, but I would also rename the release like you proposed. We can't have something called "release candidate" when we *know* it's not a candidate. Let's call it beta 2, beta 3, etc. until we can make it a release. Release candidates are really the snapshots that the release team creates when we're testing for sanity right before the actual release. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development