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:
> >> 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
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk