[Releasing] Proposal to adjust release candidate process

Frederik Gladhorn frederik.gladhorn at qt.io
Tue Jan 17 15:08:37 CET 2017

On onsdag 21. desember 2016 07.58.32 CET Tuukka Turunen wrote:
... cutting away lots of text here ...
> Name of the release can be in essence whatever that does not confuse users.
> My gut feeling is that Beta 2 is not good name as we have already moved to
> the next phase in going to the release branch. We have not released the
> current process RC as final for any of the Qt 5 releases - there always
> have been a couple of fixes between RC and final. I think that as long as
> everyone is aware what the release is, it does not confuse users to call it
> RC (or RC1).

I think we don't get extensive testing, because by now everyone learned that 
there will be another round of testing - along with the RC. If we just stop 
doing so much testing around RC time and only ask to test the betas, we'd be 
much more likely to get releases out in a timely fashion with less trouble.

It may take one release of all of us learning that only betas get proper 
testing, but hopefully we'll manage to communicate that. Assuming the beta is 
early enough before the release, we find big issues at that stage, get them 
fixed and then we assemble the release candidate shortly before release time. 
Assuming we do not find major issues after asking for a brief round of 
community testing, I'd suggest the release candidate goes out as releas a few 
days later without additional testing since it should be the same contents as 
beta plus the fixes for the very critical things found in beta testing.


> Yours,
> 	Tuukka
> > Maurice
> > _______________________________________________
> > Releasing mailing list
> > Releasing at qt-project.org
> > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/releasing
> _______________________________________________
> Releasing mailing list
> Releasing at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/releasing

More information about the Releasing mailing list