On 28.01.2007 00:36:01 Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Cameron McCormack:
> > > I read through some messages before 1.6’s release, and noted that even
> > > a RC must go through the formal process of getting a vote from the PMC.
> > > That’d be the next step then?
>
> Jeremias Maerki:
> > As long as you call it RC, don't make it known beyond batik-dev and
> > don't distribute it through the standard mirrors, no. See:
> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#release-typeso
> >
> > If you target a wider audience, then yes. In that case, build the
> > release files and put them on your ~/public_html/<something> (-->
> > people.apache.org/~<uid>/<something>) and then start a vote (on general,
> > cc batik-dev) referencing the files, ideally with MD5s. When the vote
> > passes the artifacts are pushed into the distribution space.
>
> Hmm, I guess I would like something in between these. I don’t really
> want to keep the RC in the distribution archive, since it’s really just
> a temporary thing. But I do want to have it tested by the wider SVG
> community. Any way this could happen? Or should I just accept that an
> RC is just like any other release? :)
Given how long RC versions popped up on the FOP users mailing list long
after final releases were available, you should see it as a normal
release which has to be approved by the PMC, even if you don't
distribute it through the mirrors. However, if you announce the release
to a wider community infrastructure may not be happy about the generated
traffic if it's not going through the mirrors.
Jeremias Maerki
|
