> On Dec 3, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Patricia Shanahan <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 12/3/2017 6:50 AM, Marcus wrote: >> Am 03.12.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >>> I would put Beta into the Splash screen, but Release I would use RC for for >>> Release Candidate plus a number. So the first version would be 4.2.0RC1 >>> >>> If this does not break something of course. >> I think this wouldn't be suitable. As soon as we have the last RC which get >> approved, it is automatically the final release build. But a RC in names and >> graphics is not what we want. >> And doing a new build without the RC stuff cannot be done as it is not what >> we had voted for. >> The max we could do is to use RC in the filenames. Then we need maybe just a >> rename and we have the final build. In the worst case it's just a new upload >> with the same binary files but then with correct filenames. >> Marcus > > I am opposed even to changing file names. Anything we do between the final > testing and uploading to SourceForge is a risk of something going wrong with > the process at a point where it can affect millions. >
FWIW, I agree. This part of the process works well enough, I think, and any "improvements" are likely not worth the risks. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
