I completely disagree. If there are known bugs in a release, it should keep a beta designation. If you're ok running a software with known bugs then you should be equally ok to run a beta version. If you're not, then you don't run a beta version and accept that you won't have all the nifty new features.
One of the advantages of open source is that there are no market-imposed ship dates, so there's no reason to keep the baggage associated with them.
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
Good to hear this. I know you're a perfectionist but in the real world no one really expects a 1.00 version to be 100% so if you have a few issue with 1.00 then there cam be a 1.01, 1.02 etc. People really don't trust a product until it hits 1.02 anyhow. So - getting to the point - I'd suggest crossing the 1.0 line sooner than later.
Also - maybe it's time soon to start switching to RC (Release Candidate) numbering indicating to the world that beta is over and 1.0 is coming. Dovecot 1.0.RC1 ....
Timo Sirainen wrote:
I'll soon create a CVS branch which is going to stabilize into the 1.0 release. I won't add new features there so it shouldn't really get broken anymore, at least because of new features..