On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 02:19:39PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > The objection for me would be because it makes no difference if you > change a RC or a release. Features in point releases are usually frowned > upon as well...
so this is a null arguement. What does the word "release candidate" mean to you? > Who gets to determine what is needed for the final release, if not the > maintainer? Of course the maintainer, however, I've simply stated my opinion on the never-ending release candidates coming along and wondering about it (and seeing bugs come *and* go) > > It is a bullshit-argumentation, I'm aware for that, but regarding > > liability, it is a matter :/ > ...there were any warranties attached to the release that the RC has > not. Neither has any kind of warranty, so these are just non-arguments, [..] > Sorry, but this is the usual whining striving to compromise product > quality in the end. Either it's "it's finished when it's finished", or > it's "release at certain point in time no matter what quality". Is it about finished when finished or maybe "get stable releases that are as bug free as possible". Mind you, we're still speaking about VPN software here, so it would be nice to have some 'stable' ground position every now and then. And yes, there is of course no warranty, but it is a difference wether you deploy software that is officially branded "a release candidate" or a "stable software" and if its just 30 minutes less you need to explain yourself. > If you're not happy with the development process, you're free to fork. > That's what open source software is all about. no, open source software is not about creating as many forks as possible. It is also about being able to publically state your opinion without having to yell for a fork immediatly. felix
