-- 

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:44 AM marcel.taeumel <Marcel.Taeumel at hpi.de>
wrote:

> fniephaus wrote
> > How about:
> >
> > ...
> > - final (new release)
> > ---------------------------
> > - alpha + build number
> > - beta + build number (as soon as there is a release manager / we are
> > working towards a new release)
> > - rc1, rc2, ... (release candidates built or approved by release manager)
> > - final (new release)
> > ---------------------------
> > ...
> >
> > If we agree that the next version should be called for example 5.2, it
> > will
> > be called 5.2 all along the release process except if we decide it should
> > be a major release. Then we do the renaming in or after the release
> > candidate phase. Example: 5.2 alpha-X, 5.2 beta-X, [ major release
> > decision
> > ], 6.0 RC1, 6.0 Final.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:27 AM Tobias Pape &lt;
>
> > Das.Linux@
>
> > &gt; wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 28.06.2016, at 09:36, marcel.taeumel &lt;
>
> > Marcel.Taeumel@
>
> > &gt; wrote:
> >>
> >> > Eliot Miranda-2 wrote
> >> >> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Ben Coman &lt;
> >> >
> >> >> btc@
> >> >
> >> >> &gt; wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Release To Manfacture
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> I much prefer "final".
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Eliot Miranda &lt;
> >> >
> >> >> eliot.miranda@
> >> >
> >> >> &gt;
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 4:05 AM, H. Hirzel &lt;
> >> >
> >> >> hannes.hirzel@
> >> >
> >> >> &gt;
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> +1 Makes sense.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> BTW, what does Rtm stand for?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I'd like to know this too.  No one seems to have answered this yet.
> >> >>> What
> >> >>>> does "Rtm" mean?  I know what RTFM means.  Doesn't seem to fit here
> >> ;-)
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> And how will minor maintenance releases be marked, which happen
> >> from
> >> >>>>> time to time?
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> As Tobias writes
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>    SystemVersion current
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> does not return an 'alpha' suffix, this should be fixed.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> --Hannes
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On 6/22/16, marcel.taeumel &lt;
> >> >
> >> >> Marcel.Taeumel@
> >> >
> >> >> &gt; wrote:
> >> >>> images,
> >> >>> doesn't
> >> >>> I
> >> >>> that,
> >> >>> them
> >> >>> can
> >> >>>
> >>
> http://forum.world.st/Renaming-Squeak-s-system-version-from-Squeak-alpha-to-SqueakTrunk-tp4902398p4902424.html
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> _,,,^..^,,,_
> >> >>>> best, Eliot
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> _,,,^..^,,,_
> >> >> best, Eliot
> >> >
> >> > RTM is not needed. After rc_n comes alpha plus the release with no
> >> suffix.
> >>
> >> I thought alpha always precedes rc's?
> >>
> >> :D
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Best,
> >> > Marcel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> Again, there is no need for "final" because the release itself does not
> need
> a suffix. It has its own repository, a version number, and usually also a
> build number.
>

Agreed. I wouldn't put "final" in the version string, so when I see a 6.0,
I know it is final. :)


>
> Only for the trunk versions, we need alpha, beta, rc to distinguish feature
> freeze and code freeze. "beta" is feature freeze and "rc" is code freeze.
>
> Best,
> Marcel
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://forum.world.st/Renaming-Squeak-s-system-version-from-Squeak-alpha-to-SqueakTrunk-tp4902398p4903794.html
> Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20160628/41f96e22/attachment-0001.htm