Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates
 74.125.83.47 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4FB0A99C.5070603@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 08:43:40 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?RW1tYW51ZWwgTMOpY2hhcm55?= <elecharny@gmail.com>
Reply-To: elecharny@apache.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Syncope 1.0.0-RC1-incubating / 2nd attempt
References: <4FAD3069.3090809@apache.org>
 <CAOGo0VYOxz5=44XvZEv-GPusBiPHkW7nDSo65LvgNfUMGCck+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FAEEB51.4030802@gmail.com>
 <CAOGo0VaED57DhrTOb+3AcZZqPCQbGtepLyBDnCu71FWwXCoo7w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOGo0VaED57DhrTOb+3AcZZqPCQbGtepLyBDnCu71FWwXCoo7w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Le 5/14/12 1:03 AM, sebb a écrit :
> On 12 May 2012 23:59, Emmanuel Lécharny<elecharny@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Le 5/12/12 1:42 AM, sebb a écrit :
>>
>>> On 11 May 2012 16:29, Francesco Chicchiriccò<ilgrosso@apache.org>    wrote:
>>>> I've created a 1.0.0-RC1-incubating release, with the following artifacts
>>>> up
>>>> for a vote:
>>>>
>>>> SVN source tag ( r1335495):
>>>>
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/syncope/tags/syncope-1.0.0-RC1-incubating/
>>> If this is the second attempt, why is it called RC1 ?
>>>
>>> Surely it should be called RC2 ?
>>
>> Depends. As the first vote has been canceled, there was nothing like an
>> official RC1.
> RC means Release candidate; if the vote passes, it becomes the release.
>
>> As noted in the subject, this is the 2nd attempt for RC1.
> Does not make sense.
>
> The second attempt is the second release candidate, i.e. RC2.
This is not the semantic we are using. A RC is just a relese that we 
expect to become the GA if no major issue is encountered. It's not 
something like an attempt to release.

See 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle#Release_candidate

The fact that we have to check that a RC is a valid RC against the ASF 
croteria does not impede the numbering scheme we use : we keep trying to 
cut a release, with the same number, until we get it correct. At least, 
that's my opinion, which may not be shared.

In any case, it should not be a blocker...

Thanks !

-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org