Re: [AD] Allegro 4.2.0 RC2

[aj <aj@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Wang wrote:

> On 2005-08-28, Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz <gradha@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  
>
> > On 2005-08-28, Peter Wang <tjaden@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >    
> >
> > > It's been uploaded.  Elias or Grzegorz needs to update the
> > > web pages.
> > >      
> > RC1 wasn't announced on the web. I presumed it was close to being
> > the final thing being released shortly. So, should I put a notice
> > about RC1 or leave it "hidden".
> >    
>
> I think it should be left hidden.  I made the patch package against
> beta4, for example.
>
>  
>
> > Practically, I see no difference
> > between beta or RC, if things continue this way.
> >    
>
> Is that your way of saying this release process is stupid? :-)
>
> I think it's a combination of various factors:
> - being wary of reaching 4.2.0, after which we have less flexibility in
>  what changes we want to make;
> - always wanting to stick in "one last feature/bugfix";
> - starting too early with the betas (IMHO most of them could have just
>  been WIPs, but we did get a lot more bug reports);
> - being a bit sloppy.
>
> I think we're very close now though.  Can we agree that the next release
> ought to be the last release before 4.2.0, or 4.2.0 itself?

thats like saying "can we predict there are no more bugs that will make 
4.2.0 broken"
i dont think we can.  because no-one really knows what is worthy of a 4.2.0
just seems like these numbers some how expect it to be close to perfect, 
which it will never be.
its only a library, even kernels get released with known bugs,  in short 
... just do it already!