[development] critical bugs vs release (candidate)
rz10 at cornell.edu
Wed Mar 1 13:46:52 UTC 2006
On 28 Feb 2006, at 22:23, Dries Buytaert wrote:
> We're down to 13 critical bugs.
> I guess we'll release a beta 5? I don't think we had 0 critical
> bugs left when we released either Drupal 4.5 or Drupal 4.6 but I'm
> willing to try. I have this feeling that it might take us many
> more weeks to fix them all.
On Feb 28, 2006, at 4:52 PM, Karoly Negyesi wrote:
> Why not RC , really?
Disclaimer: I'm relatively new around here, so please ignore this if
the community already has clearly defined conventions for these that
I'm not aware of.
In order for the terms "critical bug" and "release candidate" to
carry consistent meaning, I would suggest that we insist on getting
down to 0 critical bugs before release. IMHO, either a bug is not
critical or the code is not ready for release (i.e. not a release
candidate). If that is not the case, then it sounds to me like we
need yet another higher priority level for "show stopper" bugs.
Consistent with that, "release candidate" to me means, "this is the
version we plan to release if no critical issues arise in the next x
days", in which case I think we might be ready for a beta 5, but not
for a RC.
On a related note, I think it would be useful to have a link on the
issue submission pages that points to a help page with some
guidelines clarifying the options for the different fields (e.g. how
to decide whether to report a bug as normal or critical, etc).
Thanks to all of you for making Drupal happen,
More information about the development