On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 14:34 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On 09/17/2012 02:19 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 16:37 -0400, G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote: > >> On 09/17/2012 04:27 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > >>> It's been suggested that we should stop using 'GOLD' when talking > >>> about Alpha and Beta, and I think this is right. Only final releases > >>> should be said to have gone 'gold' - this is how the term is generally > >>> understood, and using it for Alpha and Beta releases confuses people > >>> as to their status. Jaroslav, what needs to happen for the term not to > >>> be used for F18 Beta and future Alpha / Beta releases? > >> > >> I like the suggestion to use "bronze" then "silver" then "gold" > > > > It's cute, but I think might read a bit bizarre in isolation. 'Ready for > > testing' is terminally boring, but seems safe... > > > > Although that somewhat conflicts with our release candidates of > Alpha/Beta that are also "ready for testing". > > Also, the point of marking something as GOLD was that it's ready to be > staged for distribution. GOLD meant Gold Master, that is the master > copy was produced and sent off to the duplicators. "Ready for testing" > doesn't quite embody that same idea. > > "Completed" seems to make some sense, the Alpha has been completed and > is now being staged for release. Good points, I like 'completed'. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
