Re: Re: 4.0.6

On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:03:00PM +0200, Hartmut Holzgraefe wrote: > Matt McClanahan wrote: > > > I don't see inviting this wider audience as providing enough beneficial > > information to justify the work of clearing away the less useful > > reports. > > right now we invite this wider audience the day we release a 'release' > and again and again we end up with a .pl1 James already addressed this in the top of his post that I responed to, and quoted. Release cycles are supposed to happen in a much shorter period of time than the lifetime of an actual release. Given that releases can't expect to tackle all known bugs, the goal becomes hitting a reasonable number of bugs, such that the release cycle doesn't take too long, while still making good progress on the number of outstanding bugs. > i just want to get into some process that shifts labels here > making what we call 'release' now the final release candidate > so that we end up with a release that deserves this name > without having an .pl1 attached > > if you do not want to see useless bug reports you should not release > at all Such bugs are inevitable, against releases. However there's no reason that such bugs have to be inevitable against release candidates when the people testing them are all (theoretically) knowledgable about how to submit a good bug report. Matt