On 4/8/11 12:14 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
>> Its the way we do it.
> F13 is the earliest mention I can find mention of "Beta RC" on
> devel-list. But that doesn't really change the validity of my
> statement. It's confusing, and we should change it.
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.
Thoughts?
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
