Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-qa] LibO 3.5.0 Beta 0 First assessment

Cor Nouws píše v So 03. 12. 2011 v 18:27 +0100:
> Michael Meeks wrote (03-12-11 15:50)
>
> >     Yes ! we have not branched yet; master will branch at the
> > feature-freeze before B1 so we have:
> >
> > master -------- Beta0 -------\----------- crazy stuff ...
> >                                \
> >                                 \----- Beta1 --- stabilisation - Beta2
> >
> >     etc. :-
>       
> Correct. While explaining the whole event to someone else, suddenly it 
> became clear to me it might be much clearer when we have another naming 
> scheme:
>
> master ----- Alpha1 -------\----------- crazy stuff ...
>                              \
>                               \----- Alpha2 --- stabilisation - Beta1
>
> The great advantage of this is, that people having some expectation on 
> what a beta1 is, will not be disappointed.
> Also, the whole schedule will not change, only the naming will be 
> conform what people get offered.
> Will be something that marketing is going to praise us for, isn't it?

Hmm, I am not sure. IMHO, the naming scheme is a big social engineering
game. openSUSE started using milestones instead of alpha/beta versions
two years ago. One reason was that alpha made people feel that it was
something non-stable => developers did not care, testers did not test.
Also it solved the problem with the very broken beta1. This time, for
12.1 release, they introduced beta and rc back again. I think that it
was because the milestones were confusing. Milestone8 did not indicate
that it was after feature freeze and that it was last release before rc.
People were surprised that there was milestone8 and then rc1. Nobody was
ready for such quick release and no time for bugfixing.

I am afraid that if we call beta1 as alpha1, people will not test it
much.

I would prefer to keep it as is. In each case, I do not feel like
deciding about this myself.


Best Regards,
Petr