Re: [RFC] 3.1 branching

On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:50 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 21:34 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>
> > Which is the time where 3.1.2 is labelled a RC. Tarball rolled, but not
> > yet on the FTP server or announced on squid-announce, and labelled as an
> > release candidate on the web server.
> >
> > Before that there is also the nightly snapshots which works well for
> > testing of the upcoming release, so the number of times a RC fails
> > should be nearly zero. But it's still a timeframe which is needed to
> > ensure we do not label obviously broken releases as "stable".
>
> IMO, we do not have enough resources to label releases as stable. We can
> only label whole branches.
>
> That is, I do not think we should do RCs for X.Y.2 and beyond. Once the
> branch is declared stable, we do our best to keep each release that way.
> There will be bugs, but we do not have enough resources to RC every
> supposed-to-be-stable release after the first one (3.1.1).

Actually, RC should be issued for 3.1.0.47, not for 3.1.1.

3.1.1 is just a copy of 3.1.0.47 if the latter was proven to be stable.
If not, we post 3.1.0.48.

$0.02,

Alex.
Received on Thu Sep 25 2008 - 19:54:17 MDT