On 2/20/2017 2:19 AM, Deepti Sharma S wrote: > Can anyone confirm, is there any specific reason in the naming > convention in this release and to make it as "alpha". As per my > understanding Alpha means its beta release and not recommended to use > in production, however as per below mail it seems many customers using > the alpha version, so there is no harm to use this version.
The developers have decided that the 3.5 branch is currently alpha. This is a different designation than beta. Here's how I interpret the stages of public software releases, from the point of view of the developers, but others may see them differently: Alpha: We've got the code finished, we think it works, now we want to find out whether it works for other people. Beta: We fixed problems that brave people helped us find in the alpha releases. The latest build works for everyone who's tried it so far, now we want to get it out to a wider audience that can really pound on it and see whether it's bulletproof. Stable: All the problems found during alpha and beta have been fixed, the software seems to perform well under heavy usage, and now it's ready for everyone. Information available on this list indicates that the current plan is that version 3.5.3 will be beta, and there is no scheduled release date. For 3.4.x, there was only one beta release before it changed to stable, but there's no guarantee that history will repeat itself. The release version numbers did not contain the text "alpha" or "beta" for the 3.4 releases -- that is new this time. It looks like this project typically has a very slow release cycle. The 3.5 branch has been in alpha for two and a half years, significantly longer than 3.4 was in that state. The last 3.5 release was July of last year, and the previous release was nearly a year before that. If any show-stopper issues had been discovered, it is likely that there would have been more frequent releases. If somebody chooses to run mission-critical systems on 3.5, they do so at their own risk ... but the risk is probably low. Thanks, Shawn
