directory-kerby mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julian Hyde <>
Subject Release names
Date Mon, 04 Apr 2016 22:04:59 GMT
Has anyone commented that on your release naming policy? Maybe you’ve got a good reason for
including “RC” in release names, but I wanted to point out that they look strange to people.

Josh Elser just included Kerby 1.0.0-RC2 in Apache Calcite’s Avatica sub-project[1], and
my first reaction was, “Why is he including a release candidate as a dependency?” We have
a policy of not depending on release candidates or snapshots. In Apache, a release candidate
has not necessarily passed a vote, so is not necessarily “clean” from an IP standpoint.
Your releases are clean (I found the vote thread[2]) but they look “dirty”.

If you had named the release ‘1.0.1-beta’ it would have captured the fact that you viewed
it as beta quality but still distinguished it from other releases and the release candidate(s)
of that release.


[1] <>

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message