On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 13:19 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> 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?
works for me.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
