[Bf-committers] call for test build 2
letterrip at gmail.com
Wed Apr 2 18:41:17 CEST 2008
> Not trying to fight. ;)
> It sounds like were not ready for release yet, just looking for bugs to
> fix but also trying to get the bugs below 50. (Again it sort of sounds
> like we do not know what we are doing....)
The getting additional bug reports is for ensuring there are no
critical bugs, below fifty is desireable but not crucial - we can
release with a higher than 50 bug count if it is decided that is
reasonable - (ie there are bugs like the metaball bug that are such
corner cases, that while it might be nice to address, there impact to
user work flow is negligible.)
So the two goals work to different purposes and have different degrees
> I have two recommendations:
> The first is when we call a release build from now on we should specify
> the name to use: blender-2.46-test2-(platform) or blender-2.46-RC1-(platform)
> And everyone should stick with the name given. Pretty much every RC
> we have had different names and its a pain in the butt.
Agreed that a consistent naming scheme is desireable. Your suggested
layout is certainly reasonable.
> Some people
> do rc1 some do RC1, some add the - some don't.... In general I've
> been fixing them up by hand after the fact, but its a lot of work
> for pretty much nothing.
> The second is we pick a name and stick with it, we have been doing
> blender-(VERSION)-RC1, RC2 etc... so I'd say stick with that, even
> if this release isn't quite the same as others.
The problem comes in that there are pretty commonly accepted meanings
for RC - and thus using that naming scheme for builds which are
expected to undergo serious changes yet can cause confusion. I agree
that consistency is also desireable, I'm just not sure which principle
is of greater importance.
More information about the Bf-committers