[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: My first message... more of a mad mans rant...

Stackpole, Chris wrote:
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have suggested what so ever in any way shape or
I could re-explain but I won't... you just wasted 8 reading paragraphs of my life listening to you arguing against a suggestion I didn't make.

Please re-read what I suggested in my -original- message and not the
with the highlights for the other person that totally misunderstood the

purpose of original message.

OK. I will. I quote from your original email:

"If we had Alpha releases, say 'lenny-alpha1' release at a point where
there's no major block/crash-like problems being caused then people
could download that milestone release.  'lenny-alpha1' could then not
update until 'lenny-alpha2' is released"

Sounds like you want to have pre-stable release to me. It's called a
Release Candidate.

I still see no reason to have separate releases or stages within
testing. I think it is more trouble then it is worth for the developers.

Chris Stackpole
You're gonna get tired of me telling you that you don't read.

What I also put was this...
"These milestones don't have to affect the way it is developed, just someone keeping an eagle eye out for a weekly generated ISO that -kinda works OK- that can be relabelled Alpha 1, 2, 3 etc... and with a tweaked apt so it doesn't update until the next Alpha."

I'm _NOT_ on about a pre-stable release like a RC, you might have your first alpha only a couple of months after work on lenny as "testing" first began.

I think you're just closed minded - sorry

Reply to: