Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA18701;
	Wed, 30 Apr 1997 16:53:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [204.62.130.91])
	by hyperreal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA18659
	for <new-httpd@apache.org>; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 16:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 14261 invoked by uid 500); 30 Apr 1997 23:53:33 -0000
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 16:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dean Gaudet <dgaudet@arctic.org>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: "release candidate"
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95dg3.970430164932.10030R-100000@twinlark.arctic.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

I've had a request from a user that we stop calling the betas "release
candidates", since we've been doing that since 1.2b4 and well... um.  You
know the story. 

Suppose that 1.2b11 becomes 1.2.  What is our next step?  The list of
submitted features that are good is pretty big, and we've got a bunch of
ports (at least 5 PRs with simple changes for new platforms) waiting.  Do
we just commit 'em all and call it 1.2.1? 

But that doesn't seem like a subrelease to me.  It sounds more like 1.3. 

Dean