Hi Petr,
On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 12:20 +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> 4. Always omit the human readable "rcX" and distinguish the builds
> another way, .e.g. by the tag number 3.x.y.z.
>
> Will this be enough for QA people?
Of course; this might have the opposite problem that people will think
the first RC is final: 3.5.0.1 or whatever ;-) But perhaps it will work.
I tend to think waiting extra days, and taking extra risk to do more QA
on an ~identical build with one string changed is pretty silly.
We could try using a different name for the last release Gold Master
Candidate (gmc) instead of "release candidate" or somesuch ;-) then
fewer people would know what it meant, and fewer might get uppity.
Then again, those doing the most complaining prolly perhaps missed the
release note that states that RC3 was final, and will not have to do the
many man-hours of detailed work themselves [ so it seems easy ] just to
get that one string changed ;-)
Honestly, if this is our biggest problem, we are in fantastic shape ;-)
ATB,
Michael.
--
[email protected] <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
_______________________________________________
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: [email protected]
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
