FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-09-2011, 12:35 AM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default Fedora 15 Beta RC1 Available Now!

On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 13:19:55 -0700,
Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Would it make more sense to refer to these as "Alpha Candidate", "Beta
> Candidate" and "Release Candidate" ? ac{1,2,3}, bc{1,2}, rc1 ?
>
> It does mean the name will change at each stage, but it should be more
> descriptive as to what stage we're in.
>
> Thoughts?

This seems reasonable. For those of us that worry about alpha and beta
releases the old scheme made sense, but people that aren't involved in
that could be confused and the scheme above would be clearer for that
group. With the lists being index by search engines it isn't difficult
for people who wouldn't understand the context to run across the terms,
so it's reasonable to worry about it.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-09-2011, 09:03 AM
Dodji Seketeli
 
Default Fedora 15 Beta RC1 Available Now!

Dennis Gilmore <dennis@ausil.us> a écrit:

> Chris its the teminology we have always used.
> each phase has a series of release candidates.
>
> for alpha we do a series of RC composes until we get one that meets the
> release criteria, it then becomes the alpha release.
>
> for beta we do a series of RC composes until we get one that meets the release
> criteria, it then becomes the beta release.
>
> for GA we do a series of RC composes until we get one that meets the release
> criteria, it then becomes the GA release.
>
>
> Its the way we do it.

For the sake of better search indexing, could you please point us to a
link where this is documented?

Thanks.

--
Dodji
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-09-2011, 07:30 PM
Roberto Ragusa
 
Default Fedora 15 Beta RC1 Available Now!

On 04/09/2011 02:35 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 13:19:55 -0700,
> Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Would it make more sense to refer to these as "Alpha Candidate", "Beta
>> Candidate" and "Release Candidate" ? ac{1,2,3}, bc{1,2}, rc1 ?
>>
>> It does mean the name will change at each stage, but it should be more
>> descriptive as to what stage we're in.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> This seems reasonable. For those of us that worry about alpha and beta
> releases the old scheme made sense, but people that aren't involved in
> that could be confused and the scheme above would be clearer for that
> group. With the lists being index by search engines it isn't difficult
> for people who wouldn't understand the context to run across the terms,
> so it's reasonable to worry about it.

Just a data point. I usually read the list, but I'm not really involved.
One minute ago I saw this thread and my first thought was
"beta RC1? what's that?".

ac{1,2,3}, bc{1,2}, rc1 is a lot better.

--
Roberto Ragusa mail at robertoragusa.it
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-23-2011, 10:10 AM
Andre Robatino
 
Default Fedora 15 Beta RC1 Available Now!

(Sorry to respond to this out-of-thread, but gmane doesn't seem to have
this thread indexed except for my original post.)

Jesse Keating wrote:

> This is fair criticism. I believe I'm the one that started referring
> to these composes as "release candidates" more vocally. We needed a >
way to reference the succession of attempted composes for a release
> point, be it Alpha, Beta, or GA. Calling them release candidates
> made sense to me, however I can see how they could be confusing.
>
> Would it make more sense to refer to these as "Alpha Candidate",
> "Beta Candidate" and "Release Candidate" ? ac{1,2,3}, bc{1,2}, rc1 ?
>
> It does mean the name will change at each stage, but it should be
> more descriptive as to what stage we're in.

How about just including the unabbreviated version in each announcement?
For example, "Fedora 15 Beta Test Compose 1 (TC1)", "Fedora 15 Beta
Release Candidate 1 (RC1)", etc. This way, the current abbreviations
(15-Beta.TC1, 15-Beta.RC1, etc.) used in both the wiki and the download
directories don't have to change. Currently all the names are of the
form "Fedora m {Alpha,Beta,Final} {TC,RC}n". If the RCs are renamed as
you suggest, it seems to make the whole naming scheme more complicated,
since not only would each series of RCs have a different name, but the
TCs would have to be named differently from the RCs as well. Would they
be named the same as now ("Alpha TC") or as "Alpha Compose"? If the
latter, would this cause problems since "Alpha Compose" and "Alpha
Candidate" both abbreviate as "AC"?


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:41 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org