Kellanved wrote:As a software engineer, I have to wonder about that statement. We had significant regression, which requires a prolonged RC phase. More than 5 RCs can happen, they happen in open source a lot, they also happen in the "real" world. The software was just not ready, community unstable releases are our main means of getting feedback about issues (sadly ,there are now very few CVS users).
We will make significant changes to our QA in the near future.
I'm a software engineer also. Not for OS, purely custom built commercial applications.
My main point was since the release of rc1 there have been 360+ changes/features/fixes. Each of these could have involved multiple files (5-20 on average looking through statcvs).
While i'd be happy if these changes were in an extended beta phase, i don't think its appropriate for a RC cycle.
RC means "i think its done, please make sure we havent missed anything".
Using the current versioning the RC1 should have been released around version RC5 or even RC7.
I'm not taking anything away from the great job that just has been done, i just purely think the decision to change to the RC phase seems with all these changes to be a political/marketing one rather than a functional/technical one.
While to some people it may be just "a name", they do have differing meanings, especially for someone in the field.