On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Barry Warsaw email@example.com wrote:
On Oct 2, 2008, at 12:31 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
IMHO if there's still big scary stuff out there, calling this a release candidate does us no good PR-wise, and does no good for our users. 3.0 is going to be scary enough for them as it is - cutting a release candidate that we either know is broken, or else has significant changes, is a very bad idea.
I concur. Better to go through another beta. It feels like 3.0 is being rushed.
I agree. I'm swamped right now, but I will try to put together a revised schedule proposal later tonight.
Someone please distract Guido while I "borrow" the keys to the time machine.
No need to be sneaky about it, go right ahead. I don't think we should retroactively rename rc1 to beta4, but we can certainly label the next release as beta5, with an explanation, and the first real release candidate should be called rc2 to avoid confusion.
BTW I'll go over the release blockers today and see what I can do. We've got to get this baby back on the road! :-)