Re: [boost] Updated Development and Release Practices for 1.35.0

From: Michael Fawcett (michael.fawcett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-24 12:14:24

On 8/24/07, Johan Nilsson <r.johan.nilsson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
> > Gottlob Frege wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >> Basically, I'd like words like
> >> - 'released' (note the 'd')
> >> - 'in_progress'
> >> - 'release_candidate'
> >>
> >> or similar.  But maybe that's just because I don't use SVN.
> >
> > Hum... "branches/release_candidate" would certainly be more explicit
> > than "branches/release". It is longer, but an SVN user doesn't
> > actually
> > have to type the name very often, so I'm not inclined to worry about
> > that.
> >
> > Anyone else care to hazard an opinion on "branches/release_candidate"
> > vs "branches/release"?
>
> +1 for "branches/release"

I would vote for "candidate" instead of "release".  "release" implies
that it has been released, and "release_candidate" is too long.  I
thought about "RC" for a bit, but I think it's too short.  And, at the
risk of going full circle again, I really like "stable".

> Shouldn't the "release_candidate"(s) be found under tags/.../RC_nnn? Won't
> this be a possible source of confusion?

Well, as I understand it, there is only ever 1 "release candidate",
and that is branches/release (or whatever the name will be).
Libraries will be developed on their own branch, and then merged into
branches/release.

--Michael Fawcett