Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.220.180 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+Y+444v4mcg5fwpDBcB3ftHLB1T7J93mzGmLoujAUpBuK5Nkg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAJ_m3YCeLKDMFp3VvB4jsak0GAV8tU59J+Bjks4+Fs8+4c628A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Y+444+pktHo-3g2Y8ieQ=oKbe-oE_BV_UbnnyqYWG0dYMxvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <6BC9C06A-D317-409F-83E8-F898CAB3A617@spy.net>
 <E10FB54E-8362-41DA-A5EA-6876BB5AC605@apache.org>
 <6B64ED84-544F-4C84-9DD4-D794AD025380@spy.net>
 <82F3E1E5-A9C7-4EC7-BEBF-E4BAD753AF85@gmail.com>
 <CAJ_m3YCcSUmD9gGxys2b+SMREUUV3n1iraKQ93Av5dzQOt0FMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FD791CC-15A9-4FE9-97B6-76D1B2BD850C@spy.net>
 <CA+Y+444v4mcg5fwpDBcB3ftHLB1T7J93mzGmLoujAUpBuK5Nkg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 22:57:32 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAJ_m3YD_FewrN8ZhEhUM4TRd=a40TcrWsmuVbB55mhJtOgoh7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Tweaking the release procedure
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Dustin Sallings <dustin@spy.net> wrote:
>
> In the above example, if someone downloaded and is currently running
>> 1.1.1-rc1 and he looks at the list of tags and sees v1.1.1, v1.1.1-rc1 a=
nd
>> v1.1.1-rc2, why would be confused? =A0More importantly, you released tha=
t, so
>> why would you not want the user to be able to see whether any changes
>> between 1.1.1-rc1 and 1.1.1 final affect his deployment?
>
>
> If someone has downloaded and is running an artefact from a botched relea=
se
> vote, our release procedure has failed us catastrophically. Nobody should
> EVER be running these as-of-yet-not-approved release artefacts. Except fo=
r
> testing and voting, obviously. Hence, the only reason you'd want to see w=
hat
> the changes were between 1.1.1-rc1 and 1.1.1 would be for testing a secon=
d
> round of voting. Perhaps we should eschew the "release candidate"
> nomenclature if it is causing these problems? I am worried that we might =
be
> sending the wrong message to our users who expect this terminology to mea=
n
> something else entirely. Oh, and Sorry about replying in
> a piecemeal fashion!
>

Piecemeal helps us find our way back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hansel_and_Gretel