lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    DateSat, 23 Oct 2004 10:19:40 +1000
    FromCon Kolivas <>
    SubjectRe: The naming wars continue...
    Matt Mackall wrote:
    > On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 03:05:13PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > 
    >>And the fact is, I can't see the point. I'll just call it all "-rcX",
    >>because I (very obviously) have no clue where the cut-over-point from
    >>"pre" to "rc" is, or (even more painfully obviously) where it will become
    >>the final next release.
    > 
    > 
    > This should be easy: the cut-over should be when you're tempted to
    > rename it 2.6.next. If you have no intention (or hope) of renaming
    > 2.6.x-rc1 to 2.6.x, it is not a "release candidate" by definition.
    > 
    > What's the point? It serves as a signal that a) we're not accepting
    > more big changes b) we think it's ready for primetime and needs
    > serious QA c) when 2.6.next gets released, the _exact code_ has gone
    > through a test cycle and we can have some confidence that there won't
    > be any nasty 0-day bugs when we go to install 2.6.next on a production
    > machine.
    
    I have this feeling Linus is laughing at us when he debates these 
    arguments. Nonetheless I finally feel obliged to say a "release 
    candidate" is a release candidate. It should only be called that if it 
    is planned to be the real version, and the real version is _exactly_ the 
    same bar the version number. If it isn't even planned to be released 
    unmodified it's a -pre patch.
    
    /me still hears Linus laughing. He's only been doing this for 13 years.
    
    Cheers,
    Con
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2008